Skip to main content

Full text of "Notes on the Hebrew text and the topography of the Books of Samuel : with an introd. on Hebrew palaeography and the ancient versions and facsims. of inscriptions and maps"

See other formats


Page vii, II. 3, 5 of the inscription : for IPIT read Vr\^ 
1365 Driver : Samuel ^i Pf^S^ vii 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2007 with funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 
























The present volume is designed as a contribution to the 
philology and textual criticism of the Old Testament. It 
may, I hope, be found useful as a sequel to Mr. Spurrell's 
Notes on Genesis'^. The Books of Samuel are not so 
suitable as a reading book for a beginner in Hebrew as 
some of the other historical books : for though they con- 
tain classical examples of a chaste and beautiful Hebrew 
prose style, they have suffered unusually from transcrip- 
tional corruption, and hence raise frequently questions of 
text, with which a beginner is evidently not in a position 
to deal. But for one who has made further progress in the 
language, they afford an admirable field for study : they 
familiarize him with many of the most characteristic idioms 
of the language, and at the same time introduce him to 
the grounds and principles of the textual criticism of the 
Old Testament. The idiomatic knowledge of Hebrew is 
best acquired by an attentive and repeated study of the 
Hebrew prose writers ; and I have made it my aim through- 
out not merely to explain (so far as this was possible ^) the 
text of the Books of Samuel, but also to point out and 
illustrate, as fully as seemed needful, the principal idiomatic 
usages which they exemplify. In the Introduction I have 
sought to bring within reach of the student materials — 
especially relating to Inscriptions — often with difficulty 
accessible, including matter which, at least to some readers, 
will probably be new. More space could easily have been 

^ Clarendon Press, 1887 ; ed. 2, 1896. 

^ For there are some passages which — from whatever cause — defy, or elude, 

VI Preface to the First Edition 

devoted to the subject of the Ancient Versions ; but enough, 
I hope, will have been said to illustrate their character, 
and their value to the student of the Old Testament. 
Historical questions, and questions touching the structure 
of the Books of Samuel, lying outside the plan of the work, 
have been noticed only incidentally: I have, however, 
articulated the two Books in a manner, the utility of which 
will, I hope, appear to those readers who proceed to the 
study of the sources of which they are composed. 

A portion of the volume was already in type, when the 
loan of some MS. notes of the late Prof. Duncan H. Weir, 
extending as far as a Sam. 4, 13*, was offered to me. Know- 
ing, from the extracts in Prof. Cheyne's Isaiah (1884), the 
value of Dr. Weir's suggestions, I thankfully availed myself 
of the offer. The notes, I found, were less complete than 
I had expected ; and though I gladly quoted from them 
what I could, I did not obtain from them as much assistance 
as I had hoped. 

It remains to speak briefly of the history of the textual 
criticism of the Books of Samuel. To Otto Thenius ^ belongs 
the merit of having been the first to point out systematically 
how the Septuagint frequently supplied materials for the 
restoration of the Massoretic text. His Commentary is 
eminently suggestive and stimulating ; and for the manner 
in which he has recovered, with the help of the Septuagint, 
the true text and meaning of numerous passages in the two 
Books, he has earned the lasting gratitude of Hebrew scholars. 
Thenius" results were largely utilized by Ewald in the first 
edition of his History of Israel {\'^^'^'^\ Fr. Bottcher^ followed 

1 See the Academy, 1889, Aug. 24, p. 119. 

^ Die Biicher Samuelis in the Kiirzgcfasstes exegetisches Handbuch zzttn A.T., 
ed. I, 1842 ; ed. 2, 1864. 

' Without suitable acknowledgement, as Thenius complains (Pref. ed. 2, p. vii). 
* Aeiie exegetisch-kritische Aehrenkse zu/n A. T. (1863). Comp. ib., p. viii. 

Preface to the First Edition VII 

on the same lines, sometimes correcting Thenius, at other 
times, not always happily, seeking to supplement him. It 
cannot, however, be denied that Thenius shewed a disposition 
to adopt readings from the Septuagint without sufficient 
discrimination ; and his restorations were sometimes deficient 
in point of Hebrew scholarship. In 1871 appeared an un- 
pretending but epoch-making work on the textual criticism 
of the Old Testament — the monograph of Julius Wellhausen 
on ' The Text of the Books of Samuel.' The importance of 
this book lies in particular in the strictness with which it 
emphasizes the discriminating use of the Ancient Versions 
for purposes of textual criticism. With rare acumen and 
sagacity, Wellhausen compares the Massoretic text with the 
Ancient Versions (specially with the Septuagint), and elicits 
from the comparison the principles that must have operated, 
on the one hand in the process of translation, on the other 
in the transmission both of the Hebrew text itself and of the 
corresponding Ancient Version. He thus sets in its true 
light the crucial distinction between renderings which pre- 
suppose a different Hebrew original, and those which do not 
do this, but are due to other causes ; and shews further that 
both texts, the Massoretic text as well as that of the 
Septuagint, have received modification (chiefly in the form 
of harmonistic or other additions), though in unequal degrees, 
in the process of transmission. Naturally he endorses a large 
number of Thenius' restorations; but others he subjects to 
a keen criticism, shewing that they do not rest upon a sub- 
stantial basis. Wellhausen's scholarship is fine : his judgement 
is rarely at fault ; and in the critical treatment of the text, 
I have been strongly sensible of the value of his guidance. 
But I have uniformly maintained an independent judgement, 
whether towards Wellhausen or other scholars ; and I have 
been careful to adopt nothing of importance, from whatever 
source, without acknowledgement at the time. 

VIII Preface to the First Edition 

The fact that valuable original readings are preserved by 
the Septuagint or other Versions has been recognized also 
by Gratz \ Stade ^, and other scholars : in this country by 
Mr. (now Professor) Kirkpatrick ^, in his Commentary on the 
Books of Samuel in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and 
Colleges, and the Rev. F. H. Woods, in an Essay on the 
subject contributed by him to the Stiidia Biblica *. 

A more recent work than any of these, also dealing largely 
with the criticism of the text, is Klostermann's Commentary 
on the Books of Samuel and Kings, forming part of the 
Kurzgefasster Commentar zu den Heiligen Schriften Alien 
und Neuen Testamentes, edited by Strack and Zockler (1887). 
Klostermann is a genuine scholar, an acute and able critic ; 
and his Commentary has evidently had great pains bestowed 
upon it. But in his treatment of the text, where he adopts 
an independent line, it is, unhappily, very rarely possible 
to follow him. Klostermann can make, and has made, clever 
and probable emendations : but his originality is excessive ; 
he is too ready with an ingenious but recondite combination ; 
he is apt to assume that the text has suffered more than 
is probable ; and his restorations themselves betray sometimes 
a defective appreciation of Hebrew modes of expression. 
But it remains his merit to have been the first to perceive 
distinctly the critical importance of Lucian's recension of 
the Septuagint, and to have utilized it consistently in his 

S. R. D. 

Christ Church, Oxford, 
November, 1889. 

1 Gesch. derjuden, i. (1874). ' Gesch. des V. Israels, i. (1887). 

' [And now (191 2), since 1906, Dean of Ely.] 
* Oxford, 1885, p. 21 fr. 


Just twenty-three years have elapsed since the first edition 
of the present work appeared. In the interval much has been 
done for the elucidation of the Old Testament ; and the 
student of it — especially the English student — finds much at 
hand to help him which in 1890 either did not exist, or, if it 
did exist, was either unknown, or with difficulty accessible. 
If the years have not been marked by any such epoch-making 
work as Wellhausen's History of Israel (1878), yet a number 
of works placing much new and important matter in the hands 
of students have appeared : for instance — to name only a few — 
the two series of Commentaries on the Old Testament, 
edited by Nowack and Marti ; the fifteen volumes which 
have at present (Oct. 191 2) appeared of the International 
Critical Commentary ; the Hebrew-English Lexicon, edited 
by Prof. Briggs, Prof. Brown, and the present writer ; Kittel's 
very useful Biblia Hebraica ; Kautzsch's greatly improved 
editions (dating from 1889) of Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, 
two of which have been translated into English (1898, 1910) ; 
the two great repertories of Biblical learning, Hastings' 
Dictionary of the Bible (i 898-1 904), and the Encyclopaedia 
Biblica (i 899-1 903); G. A. Cooke's North- Semitic Inscrip- 
tions (1903) ; and the Papyri of Assuan and Elephantine, 
published respectively by Sayce and Cowley (1906), and 
Sachau (19 11), which have thrown such unexpected light on 
the social and religious condition of the Jews of Upper Egypt 
in the fifth century B.C. 

The new knowledge, derivable from these and other sources, 
I have endeavoured, as far as the scope of the work permitted, 
to make available for students of the Old Testament in the 
present edition. This edition exceeds the first edition by 
more than 100 pages. The character of the work remains, 

1355 a 3 

X Preface to the Second Edition 

however, unaltered, its object being still, as I said in the 
Preface to the First Edition (p. V), not solely to explain the 
text of the Books of Samuel, but, while doing this, to teach 
the student to understand Hebrew philology, and to appre- 
ciate Hebrew idioms. The increase in size is due partly 
to the incorporation of new matter of the kind just referred to, 
and to the notice that necessarily had to be taken of the many 
new suggestions about the text, which had been made in 
(especially) the very ably-written Commentaries of Budde, 
H. P. Smith, and Nowack ; and partly to the fact that I have 
enlarged the scope of the book, — and, I hope, increased at the 
same time, its usefulness, — by adding fresh notes, not only on 
points of philology and idiom, but also on the topography 
of the Books of Samuel. I was led in the first instance to 
deal with the latter subject by the desire to illustrate from 
these Books the force of the * went up ' and * came down,' at 
once so characteristic of the historical books of the Old 
Testament, and so vividly reflecting the physical features 
of the country in which they were written ; and then, in view 
of the many highly questionable identifications of ancient 
sites in the current English maps of Palestine^ (to which 
I have called attention elsewhere^), I went further, and added 
notes on the sites of places mentioned in the Books of Samuel. 
The notes are brief; but they embody often the result of 
considerable research. To illustrate further the topography 
of the Books, I have added Maps, indicating the elevations 
(which are important for following properly the history), and 

1 Except those in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, which are above reproach. 

2 See the Expository Times, xiii (July, 1902), p. 457 ff. ; xxi (Aug. and Sept. 
1910)) 495 ff., 562 ff. ; Expositor, 191 1, Nov., p. 388 f., 1912, Jan., pp. 25 «., 26;;., 
32 f., Feb., p. 124 f. Bartholomew, though an admirable chartographer, clearly does 
not possess the philological and historical knowledge enabling him to distinguish 
between a sound and unsound identification of an ancient site. But G. A. Smith's 
Historical Atlas 0/ the Holy Land, which is likely now (Feb., 1913) to appear 
shortly, may be confidently expected to satisfy all requirements. 

Preface to the Second Edition XI 

including all such sites as can be reasonably identified, those 
which are doubtful or conjectural being marked by a query. 

I have naturally, in preparing this edition, adjusted refer- 
ences (e.g. those to Gesenius-Kautzsch) to the latest editions 
of the works referred to, and also referred to more generally 
accessible books in preference to the less accessible books 
which in 1889 were often alone available (e.g. to Dr. Cooke's 
NSI., in preference to the CIS). I have also enlarged the 
Index, and made it, I hope, more useful to those who wish 
to study Hebrew idioms. In the transliteration of Hebrew 
and Arabic names, especially names of places, I am sorry to 
say, I have not succeeded in attaining uniformity ; but I hope 
that no serious misunderstanding will arise in consequence. 

Conjectural emendation, especially in the prophetical and 
poetical books of the Old Testament, is at present much in evi- 
dence ; and I venture to add a few remarks upon it. 

The value of the Ancient Versions for correcting — naturally, 
with the precautions noted on pp. xxxviii, xlv — the Massoretic 
text is now generally recognized by Biblical scholars. But it 
must be evident to a careful student of the Massoretic text 
that the Versions do not enable us to correct all errors in it ; 
and hence the necessity of conjectural emendation must be 
admitted. Passages often occur which strongly excite sus- 
picion ; and the character of the ancient, unpointed script is 
such as to lend itself readily to corruption. The fact that 
a clever scholar can indulge his genius for improvement to 
excess is not evidence that conjecture, in itself, is illegitimate. 
We must exercise judgement and discrimination. An emenda- 
tion, to be convincing, must yield a good sense, unmistakeably 
superior to that of the Massoretic text, be in accordance with 
idiom, and not differ too widely from the ductus litteraruni 
of the existing text, — especially in the older script. It ought 
also not to presume unduly that, when only limited remains 
of Hebrew literature have come down to us, we have an 

XII Preface to the Second Edition 

absolute knowledge of what might, or might not, have been 
said in the ancient language. Conjectural emendations, satis- 
fying these conditions, have unquestionably been made, 
including some which have afterwards been found to be con- 
firmed by the testimony of an Ancient Version. On the 
other hand, it is impossible not to feel that a large proportion 
of the conjectural emendations which have been proposed rest 
upon arbitrary or otherwise insufficient grounds. There are 
also many of which it is impossible to say more than that they 
viay be right, they are such as the author might have written, 
but we can have no assurance that he did write them. Hence 
they can be adopted only with the qualification ' perhaps.' The 
conditions under which the writings of the Old Testament 
have come down to us are such that the legitimacy of con- 
jectural emendation is undoubted ; we must only satisfy 
ourselves, before definitely accepting a conjectural emendation, 
that the grounds upon which it rests are sound and suflicient. 
For the typographical accuracy of the volume I am greatly 
indebted to Mr. J. C. Pembrey, Hon. M.A., the octogenarian 
Oriental 'reader' of the Clarendon Press. Nearly every 
Oriental work that has been published by the Press during the 
last fifty years, including, for instance, Max Miiller's Rig-veda, 
Payne Smith's Thesaurus Syriacus, and Neubauer's Catalogue 
of Hebrew MSS. in the Bodleian Library, has had the benefit 
of Mr. Pembrey's watchful supervision : but, notwithstanding 
his years, his eye, as I can testify from experience, is still un- 
dimmed, and he is still as able as ever to bestow upon a book 
passing through his hands that interest, and more than con- 
scientious care, which so many Orientalists have learnt to 

S. R. D. 
Christ Church, Oxforp, 
October 28, 191 2. 


List of Abbreviations ....... 

Addenda .......... 

Introduction : — 

§ I. The Early History of the Hebrew Alphabet 

§ 2. Early Hebreiv Orthography ..... 

§ 3. The Chief Ancient Versions of the Old Testament 

§ 4. Characteristics of the Chief Ancient Versions of Samuel 

Appendix : — 

The Inscription of Meshct, commonly known as the '^ Moahite 
Stone ' 

Note on the Maps 

Notes on I Samuel 

Notes on II Samuel 

Index of Subjects 

Index of Hebrew Words and Idioms 

Index of Places. 

I. Hebrew Inscribed Tablet from Gezer 
II. The Siloam Inscription .... 

III. The Carpentras Stele ..... 

IV. Part of an Egyptian Aramaic Papyrus, of 484 b.c. 
V. Egyptian Aramaic Papyrus .... 

VI. Inscription of Tabnith, King of Zidon . 












To face p. vii 
p. ix 
p. xii 
p. xvi 
p. xvii 
p. xxiv 

The Pass of Michmas 
Section of Northern Palestine . 
Section of Central Palestine 
Section of Southern Palestine 

To face p. 106 

„ P- 213 

At the end of the volume 


AJSL. = American Journal of Semitic Languages. 

al. = alii, aliter. 

alt. = alternatively (to denote one of two suggested views). 

Aptow. I, II, III = Aptowitzer, V., Das Schriftwort in der Rabbinischen 
Liter atur : (I) in the Sitzungsberichte der Akad. der Wiss. in 
Wien, vol. cliii (1906), Abhandl. VI; (II) ibid. vol. clx 
(1908), Abh. VII (on ancient renderings, and citations, of 
I Sam.); (Ill) in the XVLIL. Jahresbericht der Isr.-Theol. 
Lehranstalt in Wien, 191 1 (on 2 Sam. and Joshua). 

AV. = Authorized Version. 

33 = the Rabbinical Bible, edited by Jacob ben Hayyim, and published 
by Daniel Bomberg, Venice, 1524-5. 

Baer = Liber Samiielis. Textum Masoreticum accuratissime ex- 
pressit, e fontibus Masorae varie illustravit, notis criticis 
confirmavit S. Baer (1892). 

Bo. = Bottcher, Fr., Netie exeg.-krit. Aehrenlese zum A. T. (above, 

Sometimes also the Atisfiihrliches Lehrbuch der Hehr. Sp?-ache, 1866, — a 
gigantic Thesaurus of grammatical forms, of great value for occasional refer- 
ence, but not adapted for general use. 

Bu. = Budde, K., Die Biicher Samuel erklart, 1902 (in Marti's Kurzer 

Hand-Commentar zu?n A. T). 
Buhl = Buhl, F., Geograplrie des alien Paldstina, 1896. 
CIS. = Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, Parisiis, 1881 flf. 

Tom. I contains Phoenician Inscriptions ; Tom. II Aramaic Inscriptions. 

DB. = Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. In five volumes (1898- 

Dh. = Dhorme, Le Pbre P., Les Livres de Samuel, 19 10. 
LB. = Encyclopaedia Biblica (i 899-1 903). 
Ehrl. = Ehrlich, A. B., Randglossen zur Hebr. Bibel, vol. iii, 19 10. 

Clever ; but apt to be arbitrary, and unconvincing. 
EVV. = English Versions (used in quoting passages in which AV. 
and RV. agree). 

XVI List of Abbreviations 

Ew. = Ewald, H., Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Sprache, ed. 7, 1863; 
ed. 8, 1870. 
The Syntax has been translated by J. Kennedy, Edinburgh, 1881. 

Gi. = Ginsburg, C. D., Massoretico-critical edition of the Hebrew Bible, 

1894 ; ed. 2, much enlarged, now [1912] appearing. 
GK. = Gesenius' Hebrew Gra?7wiar, as edited and enlarged by 

E. Kautzsch (ed. 28, 1909), translated by A. E. Cowley, 

1 910. 
H.G. = G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, 1894. 
fBLit. ■= fournal of Biblical Literature (Boston, U.S.A.). 
Ke. = Keil, C. F., Commentar fiber die Bucher Samuelis, ed. 2, 1875. 
Kenn., Kennedy = A. R. S. Kennedy, Samuel (in the Century Bible), 

Kit., Kitt. = Kittel, Biblia Hebraica (with footnotes, containing 

a selection of various readings from MSS., the Versions, 

and conjecture), 1905. 
Kit. ap. Kautzsch = Kittel's translation of Samuel in Kautzsch's Die 

Heilige Schrift des A.T.s, ed. 2 , 1 9 1 o. 
Klo. = Klostermann, Aug. (above, p. VIII). 
Kon. = Konig, F. E., Historisch-kritisches Lehrgebaude der Hebr. 

Sprache, i. (Accidence), 1881 ; ii. (Forms of nouns, numerals, 

adverbs, &c.), 1895; iii. (Syntax), 1897. 
Exhaustive, with full discussions of alternative views. 

Kp. = Kirkpatrick, A. F., Commentary on Samuel in the Cambridge 
Bible for Schools and Colleges, 1880. 

Lex. = Hebrew and English Lexicon, by F. Brown, S. R. Driver, and 

C. A. Briggs, 1906. 
Lidzb. = Lidzbarski, Handbuch der Nordsemitischen Epigraphik, 1898. 
Lo. = Lohr, Max, Die Bucher Samuels, 1898 (in the Kurzgefasstes 

Exegetisches Handbuch, taking the place of a third edition ■ 

of Thenius). 
LOT.^ = Driver, S. R., Introduction to the Literature of the OT., 

ed. 8, 1909. 
Luc, Lucian = Lucian's recension of the LXX (see p. xlviii ff.). 
MT. = Massoretic text. 
NHWB. = J. Levy, Neuhebrdisches und Chalddisches Worierbuch, 


List of Abbreviations XVII 

Now. = Nowack, W., Rkhter, Ruth und Bilcher Samtielis, 1902 (in 

Nowack's HandkommeJitar zum A.T.). 
A^SI. = G. A. Cooke, -(4 Text-Book of Norih-Semiiic Inscriptions, iQOS* 
01. = Olshausen, Justus, Lehrbuch der Hebrdischen Sprache, i. 1861, 
A masterly work, containing, however, only the Laut-, Schrift-, and Formen- 
Lehre. The author never completed the syntax. The chapter devoted to 
the formation of Hebrew proper names is valuable. 

Ojiom. = P. de Lagarde, Onornastica Sacra, ed. i, 1870. 
OTfC? = W. R. Smith, The OT. in the frmsh Church, ed. 2, 1892. 
PEFQS. = Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fwid. 
Pedes = Felix Perles, Analekten zur Textkritik des A.Ts, 1895. 
PRE? — Realencyklopddie fur Protestantische Theologie und Kir c he, 

ed. 3 (edited by A. Hauck), 1896-1909. 
PS. = Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus. 

Reinke = Reinke, Laur., Beitriige zur Erkldrung des A.T.s, vol. vii. 

Miinster, 1866. 

On transcriptional errors in the Massoretic text, or presupposed by the 

Ancient Versions, with many illustrations. The author is a Roman 

Catholic, in his attitude towards the Massoretic text entirely free from 

prejudice, and in fact not sufficiently discriminating in his criticism. 

Rob. = Edw. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, ed. 2, 1856. 

RV. = Revised Version. 

The University Presses have issued recently, very unfortunately, an edition of 
the Revised Version without the marginal notes of the Revisers. This is 
a retrograde step, which is greatly to be deplored. The Revisers' marginal 
notes contain not only much other information helpful to the reader, but 
also a large number of renderings unquestionably superior to those of the 
text, of which it is an injustice to deprive the public, even in a single edition. 
Readers of the present volume are asked, as occasion offers, to explain to those 
who desire to make the best use of the Revised Version the paramount 
importance of reading it in an edition containing the marginal notes. On 
the character and value of these notes, and on the best way of making profitable 
use of them, I may refer to pp. xxiv-xxxii of ray Book of Job in the Revised 
Version (1906). In the notes to this edition of Job, as also in Woods and 
Powell's very M%th\\ Hebrew Prophets for English Readers {^\o\s., 1909- 
191 2), attention is regularly called to the marginal renderings preferable 
to those of the text. 

Sm. = Smith, H. P., TTie Books of Samuel, 1899 (in the International 

Critical Commentary). 
Stade = Stade, B., Lehrbuch der Hebrdischen Grammatik, i. 1879. 
On the lines of Olshausen. The most convenient book for those who desire 
an accidence more comprehensive than that of Gesenius-Kautzsch, and 

XVIII List of Abbreviations 

yet not so minute or elaborate as those of Olshausen or KOnig. The 
syntax never appeared. 

Th. = Thenius, Otto (above, p. VI). 

T. W. = Conder, C. R., Ten/ Work m Palestme, ed. 1887. 

We. = Wellhausen, Julius (above, p. VII). 

ZATW., ZAW. ■=. Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestamentliche Wtssenscha/t, 

edited by Bernhard Stade, 1881 ff, 
ZDMG. = Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenldndischen Gesellschaft. 
ZDPV. ■=■ Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paldstina-Vereiiis. 
'J1 = -iDiJI and the rest = ' etc' 

The readings of the Septuagint, when not otherwise stated, are 
those of Cod. B, as given in Dr. Swete's edition (p. xlvii). Lucian's 
recension (p. xlviii) is denoted by ' LXX (Luc.) ' or ' Luc' The 
abbreviation ' LXX ' is construed with a plural or a singular verb, 
according as the reference is more particularly to the translators 
themselves, or to the translation in the form in which we now have it. 
In words transliterated from the Hebrew, breathings (except sometimes 
the light breathings) and accents are not inserted : the earliest uncial 
MSS. have neither^; and those inserted in Swete's edition have no 
authority whatever, being merely added by the editor in accordance 
with the orthography and accentuation of the Massoretic text ^ Their 
introduction is unfortunate ; for not only does it suggest an anachro- 
nism, but their presence in the text might readily give rise to false 
inferences. After what has been said, however, it will be obvious 
that nothing can be inferred from them respecting either the readings 
of the MSS. upon which the Septuagint is based, or the accentuation 
of Hebrew words in the age of the translators. The Peshitto and the 
Targum are cited from the editions of Lee and Lagarde, respectively. 

The sign t following a series of references indicates that all 
occurrences of the word or form in question have been quoted. 

The small ' superior ' figure (as OTfC?') denotes the edition of the 
work referred to. 

In case this volume should reach any German readers, may I be 
allowed to explain that ' no doubt ' and ' doubtless ' do not affirm as 
strongly as ' undoubtedly,' and that they correspond to ' wohl ' rather 
than to ' unzweifelhaft ' } 

* Swete, Introd. to the OT. in Greek, p. 136. 
^ See Swete's OT, in Greek, i. pp. xiii-xiv. 


P. 45. Guthe {Mtltheil. des Deutschen PaL-Vereins, 1912, p. 49 ff.) 
agrees that the ' Stone of Help ' of 7, 12, set up by Samuel, is not the 
Eben-ezer of 4, r, that Beih-horon is better than Beth-car m 7, 11, 
and that Yeshanah (p. 65), if = 'Ain Siniyeh, will not suit 7, 1 1 f. 
And on Mejdel Yaba, marked on the Map as a possible site for Apheq, 
see lb. 191 1, p. 33 ff. 

P. 98, note on v. 3, 1. 2 : for 10, 10 (cf. 6) read 10, 5. 

P. 106 bottom. Conder (in the PEFQS. 1881, p. 253) objects to 
W. Abu Ja'd (leading up to Michmas : see the ]\Iap (Plate V) at the 
end of ZDPV. xxviii), as the scene of Jonathan's exploit, on the 
ground that this approach would have been naturally guarded by 
the PhiHstines, and that there would have been no occasion for 
Jonathan to climb up it on his hands and feet ; and considers the cliff 
el-Hosn (=Bozez), which, with difficulty, he climbed himself almost 
to the top (p. 252 f.), to be the place where Jonathan made his 
ascent. If the scene of the exploit is ever to be determined definitely, 
a fresh exploration of the Wady would seem to be necessary. 

P. 112, last line: /cir Jud. 11, 20 rfa(f Jud. 11, 30. 

I 15, 6. The following synopsis of the occurrences of ^ in $, the 
critical editions of Baer, Ginsburg, and Kittel, and MSS. and editions 
cited by Ginsburg, may be convenient. It will shew, among other 
things, how considerably, on Massoretic minutiae, texts and authorities 
differ. Fortunately, for exegesis, such minutiae have no importance. 

Jud. 20, 43 '^r\^:;'^y^j) BaG' (v. Baer, p. 102); 'Tf) [not ^] 99K. 
*i Sam. I, 6 nny^n gSBaKG^ 1 6 MSS., 4 Edd.J 
*io, 24 DnwngsBaKG^] -| 4 MSS., 3 Edd., and 2 Mass. lists 

cited by Aptow. II, p. 73. 
15, 6 ^T^. ^"^D BaG* I MS., Yemenite Massoretic list ap. Ginsb. 

The Massorah, iii. 73; ITi 39K 39 MSS., 10 Edd. 
*i7, 25 Dnwn ©BaKG^ 25 MSS., 4 Edd. ; 1 2 MSS., 4 Edd. 
23, 28 sjl^O BaG^ 2 MSS.; n'T>9 ^BK 25 MSS., 7 Edd.; q'T|0 
[not '?5] Yemenite Mass. list ap. Ginsb. I.e. 

* The asterisk denotes cases mentioned by Kimchi, Michlol, ed. Lyck, p. 57*. 

+ In each case, of the MSS. and early Edd. (excluding S3, which is cited here 
separately) quoted in Ginsburg's second edition (C^). On the passages cited from 
his first edition, no MSS. or Edd. are quoted by him. 

XX Addenda 

2 Sam. i8, i6 V^^ Ba 2 MSS.; V"^^ K; fj'^l^ 93G%- ^l^TiO 4 MSS., 
2 Edd., Mass. list, I.e. p. 74, cf. Aptow, III, p. 56. 
23, 28 'ino [sic] Mass. list (but in no MS. or old Ed. ; G^ ad loc). 
♦2 Ki. 6, 32 nri'N^n ©BaKG^, Mass. list, /.f. p. 73 (on i Sam. 

10," 24); -1 5 MSS., 4 Edd. 
Jer. 22, 22 m^~nj?-in Ba (v. Baer, p. 99; GK. § 22^); nn SBKG^ 

*39, 12 y^ noiND SSBaKG^ (v. Baer, p. no; GK. § 22s). 
*Ez. 16, 4 ^^?' n^?-N^ 2BBaG^K. 

21, 35 n^^V^-^K Mass. list; ") SBBaG'K. 
*Hab. 3, 13 li'N^ ;?^no BaG' 27 MSS., 1 Ed., Yemenite Mass. list, 

p. 90 ; ^^"^ 93K 15 MSS., 9 Edd. 
*Ps. 52, 5 y^ ri^nx SBaG^K, Yemen list, p. 93. 
Prov. 3, 8 ^^^^ ^nn n^ND") SBaG^K. 
*ii, 21 y^ Hi^iVn^ SBBaG^K. 
*i4, 10 "IK'S? mD SBBaG'K. 
*i5, 1 ^rn?i|» 93BaK; V.O\ 
20, 22 y^noW Ba; y-J SBG'K. 
Job 39, 9 D^^ nnNvi BaGi; On s^k. 
*Cant. 5, 2 ^9-N^»3 '^^^f SBBaG^K. 
Ezr. 9, 6 ^Vr\ rh)ih) SSBaG^K. 
2 Ch. 26, lo arnJpo Ba; nn 23G^K. 

I 17, 17. It was objected, by a reviewer of my first edition, to the 
proposal to read rW7\ DH^n nitJ'y, that Dnb must be the accusative 
of specialization (comp. Wright, Arab. Gr. ii. § 96), and that the 
Arabic grammarians (Sibawaihi, ed. Derenb. i. p. 251) in this case 
distinctly forbid the employment of the art. with the subst. But there 
are in Hebrew several cases of the numeral in the st. ahs. followed by 
a subst. determined by the art. (17, 14 D''^*l3n Twh^. Jos. 6, 4. 8 {bis), 
xZ^bis). 15, I4=jud. I, 20. I Ki. 11, 31 D''D3B'n rr\m HN), or 
a suflf. (Zech. 4, 2) ; and are we certain that the subst. in such cases is 
not in apposition (GK. § 134^; Kon. iii. § 31 2d) } Or, if in all these 
passages, the sl.c. (H'Tib'y, etc.) is to be restored, in accordance with 
the alternative Arabic construction (Wright, /.c), then it will be equally 
legitimate to restore it in i Sam. 17, 17 as well. 

On I 17, 40, 1. 2, for D^pS':^! read t3p|5?3. 

P. 253. Guthe {ib. 191 2, p. I ff.) points out objections to the iden- 
tification of el-Bireh with Be erolh, and suggests el-Laitatm, i\ m. 
NW. of Gibeon. 


§ r. The Early History of the Hebrew Alphabet. 

The Old Testament — except, possibly, the latest portions — was 
not written originally in the characters with which we are familiar ; 
and a recollection of the change through which the Hebrew alphabet 
passed is preserved both in the Talmud and by the Fathers. In the 
Talmud, Sanh. 21b we read : 'Originally the law was given to Israel 
in the Hebrew character and in the sacred tongue : it was given again 
to them, in the days of Ezra, in the ''Assyrian" character (mt^x 31133), 
and in the Aramaic tongue. Israel chose for themselves the "Assyrian " 
character and the sacred tongue, and left to the tSiwrai the Hebrew 
character and the Aramaic tongue. Who are the iStoiTai ? R. Hasda ^ 
said. The Cuthites [i.e. the Samaritans: 2 Ki. 17, 24]. What is the 
Hebrew character? R. Hasda said, ^nKJl3''^ 3n3^' The original 
character is here termed Hebrew Cl^y 3ri3), the new character mC'N ^ 
In the Jerus. Talmud, Megillah i, 71b, two explanations are offered 
of the latter term : ' And why is it called niC'N .'' Because it is 
straight ("K'^!?'?) hi form. R. Levi says. Because the Jews brought 
it home with them from Assyria^! The explanation Assyrian is 

^ A teacher of the school of Sura, d. 309. 

'^ ''»^3 xsh mn>Ji mm ^s^^\>r\ \\\^h'\ n3y 3n33 h^xyi^h min nan^j rhnr\i 
cnipn pc'h nniB's 3n3 ^Nit:"'^ \Th m''3i "•oin \\^h\ nnit^'x 3n33 snry 
^Nn'13 xnon '-1 ids mmnn |no n^cnx pc^S n3y 3n3 nimnn^ in^m 
nwi3>^ 3n3 Nnon '1 idn nn3y 3n3 ^xo. 

^ An expression of uncertain meaning: comp. Hoffmann in the ZATW. i. 337; 
Levy NHWB. s. v. 

* The same term is used elsewhere: thus in the Mishnah, Megillah i, 8 

mmoi p^sm \\^h ^3 p3n3j onaonK' n^n niniDi p^sn^ onsD p3 ;^ 

nmC'N N7X p3n3J p^X^ i.e. the sacred books might be written in any language, 
but the Tefillm and Mezuzoth only in the 'Assyrian' character. 

5 DT3 nbyB' QEJ' ^y ^h "\ i?:n i3n33 -i^^nso xinB' niK'N \vi^ xnpj r\rh\ 

isfis b 


the more probable, whether it be supposed to be used loosely for 
' Babylonian,' or whether— as others have thought— it have the sense 
of Syrian or Aramaic (as occasionally in later times appears to have 
been the case ^), and so embody a true tradition as to the origin of the 
new character. The nVii'X 3n3 is that which in later times acquired 
the name of y?"!»? 3713 or square character ^ Origen, speaking of the 
sacred name, 'says that in accurate MSS. it was written in archaic 
characters, unlike those in use in his own day " : l<m l\ irap airoU 
Kal TO 6.v€K<jiwvr]Tov TerpaypdfifxaTov oirep iirl tov xo^o-ov TrerdXov toS 
dpxic'pews iyeypaTTTO- Kvptos Se /cat rovro jrap' "EXXr^o-i ^Kc^wvctrai. Kai 
iv Tols SiKpL^iiTi rwv (lvTtypa</)a)v 'E/?/Dat/<oTs dpxaiois ypdli-li-aixi yiypairrai 
dXV ooxl Tois vw. 4)a<Tl Ycip tok "EaSpac erepois xpVa<^9ai fierd tV 
alxfxaXwcriaK. In his Commentary on Ez. 9, 4 he adds that a con- 
verted Jew, in answer to an enquiry, told him that ra apxata o-Toix^a 
c><^€pes €X€iv TO 6ai tw tov aravpov x^-P^'^'^P'- Jerome, at the 
beginning of the ' Prologus Galeatus*,' after observing that the 
Hebrews, Syrians, and Chaldaeans had all an alphabet of twenty-two 
characters, continues, ' Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Moysi totidem 
litteris scriptitant, figuris tantum et apicibus discrepantes. Certumque 
est Esdram scribam legisque doctorem, post capta Hierosolyma et 
instaurationem templi sub Zorobabel, alias litteras repperisse quibus 
mine utimur, cum ad illud usque tempus iidem Samaritanorum et 
Hebraeorum characteres fuerint.' On Ez. 9, 4 he makes a remark 
to the same effect as Origen. In his letter toMarcella, Ds decern 
nominibus Dei\ he writes, ' Nomen T€Tpaypdp.p.aTov quod dve/«^oivr?Tov 
id est ineffabile putaverunt quod his litteris scribitur n)r\> : quod quidam 
non intelligentes propter elementorum similitudinem cum in Graecis 

1 Cf. Jer. 35 (42), II. Ez. 32, 29 {'Aaavpioi for DIK , i.e. DIX) in the LXX. 

* For other statements made by the Jews respecting the change of script, and 
often dependent upon most fanciful exegesis, see Chapman, Introd. to the Pentateuch 
(uniform with the Cambridge Bible), 1911, pp. 279-287). 

3 On ^. 2, 2 (quoted by Montfaucon, Hexapla, i. 86 : in a slightly different 
form, from other MSS., in ed. Bened. ii. 539 = Lommatzsch xi. 396 f.). 

^ Or Preface to the Four Books of Kings (which were the first translated by 
Jerome from the Hebrew), designed as a defence (galea) against detractors,— 
printed at the beginning of ordinary editions of the Vulgate. 

^ Ep. 25 (ed. Bened. i. 705 ; Vallarsi i. 129). 

§ I. Change of Character in the Hebrew Script iii 

litteris repererent mm legere consueverunt ^' Epiphanius^ (d. 403) 
makes a statement similar to that contained in the extract from 
Sanhedrin, that a change of character was introduced by Ezra, and 
that the old form was only retained by the Samaritans. 

The fact of a change of character, to which these passages bear 
witness, is correct : the only error is that it is represented as having 
been introduced by one man. Tradition, as is its wont, has attributed 
to a single age, and to a single name, what was in reality only accom- 
plished gradually, and certainly was not completed at the time of Ezra 
(who came to Palestine b.c. 458). 

What, then, was that older character of which the Talmud and the 
Fathers speak, and which they describe as being still retained by 
the Samaritans ? It was the character which, with slight modifications 
of form, is found upon the Inscription of IMesha' (commonly known as 
the ' Moabite Stone '), upon early Aramaic and Hebrew gems, upon 
Phoenician Inscriptions, and upon the few early Hebrew Inscriptions 
which we at present possess, viz. those found at Samaria, Gezer, 
and Siloam ^ It was the common Semitic character, used alike, in 
ancient times, by the Moabites, Hebrews, Aramaeans, and Phoenicians, 
and transmitted by the Phoenicians to the Greeks. This character 
remained longest without substantial alteration in Hebrew proper and 
Phoenician : in Greek it changed gradually to the character with 
which we are now familiar : the transition to what is termed above the 
"'"ilC'N ZTO was effected first in Aramaic ; it was only accomplished at 
a later period in Hebrew, in consequence, no doubt, of the growing 
influence of the Aramaic language in Palestine, in the period imme- 
diately preceding the Christian era. 

Tables of the chief ancient Semitic alphabets are to be found in 

1 Comp. the Hexapla on ^. 26 (25), i ; Is. i, 2 (with Dr. Field's note); Nestle 
in the ZDMG. xxxii. 466-9, 507. 

In the palimpsest Fragments of the Books of Kings [i Ki. 20, 7-17 ; 2 Ki. 23, 11- 
27] in Aquila's Translation, found by Dr. Schechter in the Cairo Genizah, and 
published by F. C. Burkitt in 1897, and in those from the Psalms, published in 
C.Taylor's Cairo Genizah Paliinpsests (1900), the Tetragrammaton is regularly 
written in the archaic characters here referred to (cf. Burkitt, p. 15 f. ; DB. iv. 444). 

" Dexiigemmis,%(>i (ed. Dindorf, 1863,1V. 213; cited by Hoffmann, z^.^. p. 334). 

' See p. vii ff. 




most Hebrew grammars of modern times \ and they need not be here 
repeated. It will be more instructive to place before the reader 
specimens of Inscriptions themselves in facsimile. The earliest 
Inscription of all, that of Mesha' (c. b.c. 900), has not been included, 
as facsimiles of it with transcriptions in modern Hebrew characters 
are readily obtainable ^ The characters used in this Inscription 
are the most ancient of the West-Semitic type that are known ^ 
though they differ but slightly from the earliest of those that are 
figured below : the differences may be studied in detail with the aid 
of the Tables mentioned below. 

Here are examples of seals with Aramaic (Figs, i and 2) and 
Hebrew (Figs. 3 and 4) Inscriptions, the first three of which are 

Fig. I. 

Fig. 2. 

Fig. 3- 

Fig. 4. 

^yanay ^sidd^ sr^^'^mh 1 nnob 

(Levy, Taf. I, i) (Levy, Taf. I, 3) innTV P nnDDJ3 | 

(Levy, Taf. Ill, 1) (Levy, Taf. Ill, 3) 

assigned by M. A. Levy* to the eighth cent, b.c, while the fourth is 

somewhat later. 

^ There is a good one at the beginning of Gesenius-Kautzsch. More extensive 
Tables may be found in Cooke's Norih-Semitic Inscriptions {i^oi), Plates XII-XIV; 
in Plates XLIV-XLVI of the Atlas to Lidzbarski's Handbuch dernordsemitischen 
Epigraphik ( 1 898) ; and especially in Chwolson's Corpus Inscriptionum Hebrai- 
carum enthal/end Grabinschriften aus der Krim, etc., 1882 (a Table constructed 
by the eminent German palaeographer Euting, containing specimens of not less 
than 139 alphabets). 

- See Die Inschrift des Konigs Mesa von Moab fiir akademische Vorlesungen 
herausgegchen von Rudolf Sniend und Albert Socin (Freiburg i. B., 1886); and 
Plate I in Lidzbarski's Handbuch (above, n. i). 

^ The Inscription on fragments of a bowl dedicated to p37 ?y2, found in 
Cyprus in 1872, is, however, considered by somelo be of greater antiquity (see 
Cooke, NSI. No. 1 1). The characters are very similar (Lidzb. Atlas, II. i). 

* Siegel und Gemmen mit aramdischeu, phdnizischen, althebrdischen etc, In- 
schriften (Breslau, 1S69), pp. 6, 8, 34, 37. 

§ I. Old West-Semitic and Greek Inscriptions v 

No. I was found under the pedestal of a colossal bull at Khorsabad : 
Nos. 3 and 4 were obtained by M. Waddington, the former in Aleppo, 
the latter in Damascus. The resemblance of some of the characters 
to those of the Greek alphabet will be evident : the n and D are closely 
similar to t^ and =, while the forms of n and n become, when turned 
round so as to face the right, E and P respectively. The 7 and y 
exhibit quite the forms which they still have in modern European 
alphabets, L and O, but from which in the later Hebrew alphabet 
they both diverged considerably. The characters on old Phoenician 
seals and gems are so similar that it has not been deemed necessary 
to add illustrations I The following specimens of ancient Inscriptions 
from Thera will illustrate the derivation of the Greek alphabet from 
the Phoenician ' : the letters, as is often the case in the most ancient 
Greek Inscriptions, are read from right to left : — 

Fig- 5- 


Fig. 6. 

" KfpSvvo/jios 

(From Roehl's Imagines Inscripiionum Graecarum Antiquissimae , 
Berolini, 1883, Nos. i and 4.) 

The E does not differ materially from the n in Fig. 3 ; the n differs 

but slightly from the S of Mesha"s Inscription, and indeed agrees 

^ In the Inscription of Mesha', as in that to pat? pVH, from Cyprus (Cooke, 
NSI. No. II ; Lidzb., Plate II, A), the T is a simple triangle, with no elongation 
of the right side downwards ; it thus exactly resembles the Greek A, and is also 
distinct from the 1 . 

^ Examples may be seen in Levy, /. c. Taf. II ; cf. Cooke, PI. IX, B 1-7, 
' For two other rather interesting examples, from the Gortynian Code, and the 
Treaty between the Eleans and the Heraeans {c. 525 B.C.), see Berger, Hist, de 
V Ecriture dans V AntiquitP (1892), pp. 132-4 (also in Roberts, Greek Epigraphy, 
Pt. i. (1887), pp. 42, 288, — with many other facsimiles of archaic Greek inscriptions, 
PP- 23 ff., 39 ff-, etc.). 

vi Introduction 

substantially with the s] of modern printed texts : the r and K are quite 
the 3 and 3 of Mesha's : the I, which has not yet become a straight 
line, retains evident traces of its origin (cf. Fig. 3) : the M as compared 
with the N has a double turn at the top, exactly as in Fig. 3, the P and 
the A are more differentiated, but do not differ in principle from 
the forms in Figs, i and 2. By turning the letters round so as to face 
the right, the later and usual form of the Greek character is (in most 
cases) immediately produced. The evidence of Inscriptions thus 
confirms the testimony of Herodotus, respecting the origin of the 
Greek alphabet from Phoenicia \ 

The most ancient West-Semitic Inscriptions, at present known, 
next to that of Mesha, are probably the pa^ bv^ Inscription from 
Cyprus (p. iv n. 3), and the Old Aramaic Inscriptions of Zinjirli, near 

' Hd. 5. 58 Ot St ^OLViKts ovToi 01 aiiv KaS/xa) aTTiKo/xevoi . . . dWa re noWa, 
oiKTjaavTts TavTTjv TTjv x'^'PV^' €(75770701' Si5aaKa\ta is tovs "EWrjvas, Kai St] Kai 
7p(i[ji|jiaTa, ovk fovra npiv Tois"E\\i]ai, wi iixoi doKteiv rrpwra fiiv, roiai Kai ixtravTfs 
Xpe'cuj'Tai ^oiviKiS' fxeTo, 8e, x/"^coi; npo0aivovTos, ajxa t^ (puii'TJ fxerefiaXov kui tov 
fivOfxof (the shape) TWf ypafifxaTcov. TlfpioiKfov 54 a<ptas to, ttoW^ tSjv x'^P'^" 
TOVTOV Tov xpovoy 'EWrjvaiv 'Icui/es. ot TrapaXa^ovTfS Sidaxjj trapd tuiv <toiviKa!V ra 
ypd/x/xaTa p-fTappvOfiiaavTes a<p(wv 6X170 IxP*'^'''''*'' Archaic Greek characters are 
termed by him accordingly (id. 59) KaSjjiTiia ypap-iiaTa. 

A little consideration will shew generally, how by continued modification in 
different directions, the Greek and modem European character on the one hand, 
and the Hebrew square character on the other, have been developed from a common 
origin. Out of the archaic 2, the Greek B arose by turning the letter from left to 
right, and carrying round the lower part of it so as to form a complete semicircle : 
the square 2 arose by the opening and ultimate disappearance of the upper part of 
the original letter, as explained below (p. xiv f.). A and P in Greek preserved 
the distinctness of type which these letters shew on Mesha"s Inscription : by the 
addition of a tail to the 1 , and the gradual degeneration of the upper part of both 
letters, they acquired the great similarity of form which they present in most of the 
later Hebrew alphabets. Eshmun'azar's ] is almost our Z; by successive shorten- 
ing of the strokes, and extension of the angles between them, T is produced. The 
old ? is nearly our L : by the addition of a tail on the right, the square 7 is 
produced. Mesha"s J? is our O ; the first stage in the derivation of y will appear 
in Plate III. Out of the old S], the Greek fl arose by the gradual prolongation 
downwards of the upper left-hand part of the letter (see the first stage in Fig. 5) : 
the final F) is nearly the same as the old form ; the medial D merely differs from it 
by the turn to the left given to the lower part of the letter, when the end of a word 
did not bring the scribe's hand to a pause (cf. p. xix). The crooked I of the archaic 
Greek (Fig. 5 ; Roberts, 23 ff., 40 ff.) before long becomes straight (ib. 30, 61). 

Hebrew Inscribed Tablet from Gezer 
(Reproduced by permission of the Palestine Exploration Fund.) 

[Face page vii 

§ I. The Gezer Inscription vii 

Aleppo (8th cent. B.C.) ^ For our present purpose, however, these 
may be passed by ; and we may look at what is at present the most 
ancient Hebrew Inscription known, the Calendar-Inscription discovered 
in 1908 at Gezer (Plate I)*^. Its date is uncertain, but in any case it 
is later than Mesha"s Inscription, and earlier than the Siloam Inscription 
(p. ix). Those who think that the Siloam Inscription is not earlier 
than the 3rd cent, b.c, place it in the 6th cent. b. c. *; Lidzbarski 
considers it ' much older than the 6th century * ; ' and G. B. Gray 
assigns it to the 8th century ^. 

The Inscription reads (Lidzbarski) — 

f inT" PjDN inT- I 
t^♦p^ inn^ y-i 2 
n^j's nvy ww»- 3 I '^^'' 
onyB' ivp nn^ 4 

nr^T im^ 6 
X\> n-i- 7 
I.e. I The month of ingathering [Tishri]. The month of (2) sowing. 
The month of late sowing. 3 The month of cutting (or hoeing up }) 
flax. 4 The month of barley-harvest. 5 The month of the general 
harvest. 6 The month of (vine-)pruning. 7 The month of summer- 

I. im\ Though fjONI nT might be read (and similarly in the 
following lines), ' A month and ingathering ' yields a poor sense ; and 
it seems that, in spite of its rarity in the OT. (only once in prose, 
Gen. I, 24 px inTi), the 1 is the old case-ending, the 12 occur- 
rences of which in OT. are given in GK. § 90". Was this of more 
frequent occurrence in the autographs of the OT. than it is in 

1 See Cooke, NSI. p. 159 ff. ; and, for the characters, the Atlas to Lidzbarski's 
Haitdbtich, Plates XXII-XXIV, XLV, col. i. 

^ The inscriptions on ostraka, found in 1910 on the site of the ancient Samaria, 
and belonging to the time of Ahab {PEFQS. 1911, p. 79 ff.), are more ancient; 
but facsimiles of these are not at present (July, 191 2) available. 

' Stanley A. Cook, PEFQS. 1909, p. 308 f. 

* Jbid. p. 26 ; Epheme7-is, iii. 37. 

' PEFQS. 1909, p. 32. 

viii Introduction 

MT. ? ^ipN, Ex. 23, 16 p T"^yo"n« ^ipS3 njKTi nxjfa sipxn :ni 
mtrn. 34, 22t. 2. I<^i5^ (Am. 7, It, differently), or (Marti, p. 225) 
K'i?^, here, apparently, the ' late ' sowing in Feb. (Dalman, PEFQS. 
1909, p. 118; cf. Wetzstein, ap. Delitzsch on Job 24, 6). 3. "lify 
(or lii^y), cf. lifyp Is. 44, 12. Jer. 10, 3 (an axe for cutting trees). 
In Ethiopia IVV is to reap. Flax is usually pulled up ; but it may 
have been anciently cut in Palestine, as it is still about Aleppo {ibid. 
p. 90). Or (Dalm.) it may have been cut out of the ground with 
a *12fyi?, as a D'T]!^ was used in time of harvest {Ptdh iv. 4). ri*^3, cf 
>m^ Hos. 2, 7. The month meant is March. 4. DlJJf ">>T (2 Sam. 
21, 9), in April. The D is placed below the line for want of space. 
5. 'The month of the reaping (or harvest) of all things,' i.e. of the 
general harvest in May. 6. The pruning (ll?! Ct. 2, 12) meant will 
be (Dalm. p. 119), the second Y^xxxiwvg, in June. 7. KP O-e. T!!^) the late 
summer fruits (see on 2 Sam. 16, i), ripe in July or August. The 
Calendar is imperfect, containing only 8 months : but this and other 
difficulties connected with it need not here be considered ^. 

The characters are bold and clear, though evidently the work of an 
unpractised hand. Most of the characters have archaic forms (compare, 
for instance, the N, *7, 1, T, n, D, V, p, ^ with the earlier forms in the Tables 
of Cooke, Lidzbarski, or GK.) : there are few or none of the curves, or 
other modifications, which are characteristic of the later forms. The 
3 in 1. 5 is very abnormal ; but this may be due to the inexperience 
of the engraver. The letters at the lower left-hand corner are read by 
Lidzbarski as 2N, — perhaps [P"l]^"'?X I 

Until the discovery of the Gezer Inscription, the Inscription on the 
wall of the tunnel of Siloam (Plate II) was considered to be the oldest 
known Hebrew Inscription. The Pool of Siloam is situated at the 
extreme S. of the Eastern hill of Jerusalem (on the N. of which 
the Temple formerly stood), near the entrance to the Tyropoeon 
valley; and a conduit or tunnel cut through the rock from the Virgin's 

* See further PEFQS. 1909, 26 ff. (Lidzbarski), 30 ff. (G. B. Gray), 113 ff. 
(Daiches, on Babylonian parallels), ii8f. (Dalman), 189 ff. (Gray), 194 f. (Lidz- 
barski) ; lAdihaxsVi^ s Ephemeris , iii. 37 ff. (notice, p. 45, the parallel from Tose/ta, 
p. 215, 1. 15 ff., ed. Zuckermandel) ; Marti, ZAW. 1909, p. 222 ff. 

* The line above a letter indicates that the reading is not quite certain. 

Plate II 

\m J 

[Face page ix 

§ I. The Siloam Inscription ix 

Spring ' — the one natural spring which Jerusalem possesses — situated 
some distance above it, on the E. side of the same hill, leads down to 
it, and supplies it with water ^ The tunnel is circuitous, measuring 
1708 feet (Warren), or 1757 feet (Conder), though the distance in 
a straight line is considerably less. At a distance of about 19 feet 
from where the tunnel opens into the Pool of Siloam, and on the 
right-hand side as one enters it, is an artificial niche or tablet in 
the rock, the lower part of which is occupied by the Inscription. 
The Inscription was first observed in 1880, by a pupil of Architect 
Schick, who, while wading in the Pool with a lighted candle, observed 
what appeared to be characters engraved on the rock. Ultimately, 
in 1 881, a gypsum cast was obtained by Dr. Guthe, who published 
a photograph, with accompanying description, in 1882^, which has 
since been often reproduced. A portion of three lines in the In- 
scription has been destroyed through the wearing away of the rock ; 
but the general sense is quite plain. Here is the Inscription, trans- 
literated into modern Hebrew characters : 

********** Tiya . riDpjn . *i3i . n\n . nti , T['2\>'^ * * * i 

P . K'x . ^p . v[^^^ 3]pjn^ . nDN . \:h^ . myai . iy-i . W . t^*N . |r-ijn 2 

n . D^3i ******. p^D . "1V3 . mr . n\-i . o . iy-i . ^n . sn 3 

. 13^*1 . irij . hv . iHJ . m . mp^ . trs . onvnn . lan . nzp: 4 

S»i . ncN , ej^sT , DTiNoa . HDian . ba . NXir:n . p . con 5 

. D3vnn . c'NT . hv . ^vn . nna . iT-n . noN . n 6 

I.e. I. [Behold] the piercing through! And this was the manner of 

the piercing through. Whilst yet [the miners were Ufting up] 

2. the pick, each towards his fellow, and whilst yet there were three 

cubits to be pierced [through, there was heard] the voice of 
each call- 

3. ing to his fellow, for there was a fissure (?) in the rock on the right- 

hand And on the day of the 

^ Not the Virgin's Poo/, as stated incorrectly in the Palaeographical Society's 
Volume. This is a small artificial reservoir near St. Stephen's Gate, and has no 
connexion with either the Virgin's Sp7-ing, or the Pool of Siloam. 

^ See the Plan in EB. ii, facing col. 2419-20, or G. A. ?)Vi\\\.\ Jerusalem (1907), 
ii. Plan facing p. 39 ; and comp. i. 87-92. 

^ ZDMG. 1882, pp. 725-50. See also Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, i. 53. 


4. piercing through, the miners (lit. hewers) smote each so as to meet 

his fellow, pick against pick : and there flowed 

5. the water from the source to the pool, 1200 cubits; and one hun- 

6. dred cubits was the height of the rock over the head of the miners. 
The Hebrew is as idiomatic, and flowing, as a passage from the 

Old Testament, i. nzipj or '13(53 does not occur in the OT. : 3p3 
is io pierce (2 Ki. 12, 10 al.) ; )Aaj is a hole or aperture. — On the use 
of "iJl, comp. p. 192 tiole. 2. iV"?. as Jer. 6, 21 : usually ^ny*!. — iiya 
as Gen. 48, 7, cf. Am. 4, 7. 3. n*n, i.e. probably flM as 2 Ki. 9, 37 
Kt. — mi: the letters are quite clear, but the meaning is altogether 
uncertain, the word being not otherwise known, and the derivation from 
lir producing no suitable sense. 4, mpb, vocalize riipp, the infin. of 
'"""Ji?- 5- The order of the numerals in fj^NI D^nXD (the smaller before 
the greater), as Nu. 3, 50 fji^si niXO ^h^; but the order is rare in 
OT., except in P, Ez. Chr. (GK. § 134'), and with fj^N very rare ^ 
5-6. ncN nXD as nx' nxo Gen. 5, 3, and often besides in V {LOT. 
p. 131 (edd. 1-5, p. 124), No. 8; GK. § 134^). On the orthography 
of the Inscription, see below, pp. xxx, xxxii. The words, as in the 
Inscription of Mesha', are separated by dots, without spaces '^. 

The Inscription has been generally assigned to the time of Hezekiah, 
who is stated to have ' made the pool, and the conduit, and brought 
water into the city' (2 Ki. 20, 20) 'to the west side of the city of 
David' (2 Ch. 32, 30) in terms which appear exactly to describe the 
function of the tunnel in which the Inscription is .^ 

E. J. Pitcher, however {PSBA. 1897, P- 165 ff., with a Table of Alphabets ; 
1898, p. 213 ff.), pointed out the resemblance of several of its characters to those 
of a later date, and argued that it belonged to the time of Herod. His conclusions 
were combated by Conder {FEFQS. 1897, p. 204 ff.) : he replied ibid. 1898, 
p. 56 f. Stanley A. Cook, in his detailed palaeographical study of the Old 
Hebrew alphabet in the FEFQS. 1909, p. 284 ff., though not accepting a date as 
late as this, agrees (cf. p. 305 bottom) that the characters point to a date later than 
c. 700 B.C. : 'if placed early,' he remarks (p. 308), ' it embarrasses, and will always 
embarrass, Hebrew palaeography ; ' he cannot, indeed (ibid. n. 2), fix the 
approximate date with any confidence, but thinks a date in the time of Simon, 
son of Onias (see Ecclus. 50, 3 Heb.), — probably c. 220 B.C.,^not impossible. Let 
us hope that future discoveries will make the date clearer. 

^ Add I Ki. 5, 12, Ez. 48, 16. 30.32. 33. 34; and see, for further particulars, 
Herner, Syntax der Zahlwbrter im AT., 1893, pp. 72 f., 74, 79. 

^ See further, NSI. No. 2. ' Guthe, /. c. pp. 745-8; Smith, i. 1C2 f., ii. 151. 

§ I. The Siloam Inscription 


For our present purpose it is not necessary to consider this question 
further. Although some of the Siloam characters do resemble the 
later, rather than the earlier, examples of the older script (see, in 
Lidzbarski's Plate XL VI, Table III, the parallel cross strokes of the 
X, the T, the curving tail in 3, JD, J, and D, and the disappearance of 
the left-hand upright stroke of the if), they are still substantially of 
the archaic type, and there is no appreciable approximation to the 
'square' type. 

The Samaritan character, as stated in the passages quoted above 
from the Talmud and the Fathers, preserves in all essential features 
the old Hebrew type, the modifications being confined to details, and 
originally, no doubt, being merely calligraphic variations : — 

In Palestine the old Hebrew character was used regularly on coins, 
from the earliest Sheqels and half-Sheqels struck by Simon Maccabaeus 
(b.c. 1 41-135) to those of the Great Revolt, a.d. 65-68, and of Simon 
Bar-cochab, a.d. i 32-1 35 \ The example (Fig. 7) is a Sheqel of the 
third year (a tJ* i. e. 3 n:^') of Simon Maccabaeus : — 

Fig. 7. 

(From Madden's Coins of the Jews, p. 68, No. 5.) 

As characters that were entirely unknown would evidendy not be 
suitable for use upon coins, it may be inferred that though in the time 
of Christ the older character had been generally superseded (for the ', 
Matth. 5, 18, is by no means the smallest letter in the old alphabet), 
it was slill known, and could be read without difficulty. 

^ Madden, Coins of the Jeivs (ed. 3, 1881), pp. 67 ff., 198 ff., 233 ff. 

xii Introduction 

In the characters represented hitherto, no tendency to modification 
in the direction of the modern square type has been observable. Such 
a tendency first manifests itself in the Aramaic alphabet, and may be 
traced most distinctly in Aramaic Inscriptions from Egypt. Plate III 
is a facsimile of the ' Carpentras stele V a monument carved in lime- 
stone, the early history of which is not known, but which is now- 
deposited in the Bibliothfeque et Mus^e d'Inguimbert in the town of 
Carpentras (ddp. Vaucluse) in France. The monument is a funereal 
one : the representation above the Inscription exhibits the embalmed 
body of the deceased, a lady named Taba, resting on the lion-shaped 
bier, and attended by the jackal-headed Anubis at the feet, and by the 
hawk-headed Horus at the head, with the four customary funereal 
vases beneath. The figures stationed as mourners at a little distance 
from the head and feet of the bier are Isis and Nephthys. The first 
three lines of the Inscription are about 9^ inches long ; the height of 
the letters is f of an inch, or a little more. 

The Inscription { = CIS. II. i. 141 = NSI. No. 75), in square 
characters, is as follows: — 

sn^N noiK n Nmon "'snn n~i2 xnn nana i 

^np pD noiK Dip |o "-in nana nois* Dip 3 
n''Dn pni ^nyoj nni?D >in 4 

I.e. I. Blessed be Taba, the daughter of Tahapi, devoted worshipper 
of the God Osiris. 

2. Aught of evil she did not, and calumny against any man she never 


3. Before Osiris be thou blessed : from Osiris take thou M'ater. 

4. Be thou a worshipper (sc. before Osiris), my darling; and among 

the pious [mayest thou be at peace !]. 
I. KnjDJJl ; Monh is an Egyptian word, mQ?iX\\ng per/eel, pious ; the 
prefix ia (/') is the fern, article. "ir^Heb. nt: the demonstrative with 


the force of a relative, as regularly in Aramaic. But ""T ( = Arab, ji) is 
usually hardened to ''1 in Aram. (Dan. Ezr. passim) ; the same form. 

Plate LXIV in the Palaeographical Society's Volume. 

Plate III 

w S 


1-1 ;S 

O dj 

a C 

Face page xii] 

§ I. Egyptian Aramaic Inscriptions xiii 

however, recurs in Plate V, lines i, 3, 5, and, as is now known, 
is the form all but uniformly found in Egyptian Aramaic ^ 2. ^T\^^ 
something ^ is the oldest extant form ^ of the word which appears in 
Mandaic as DNl^D, in the Targums as Dy"!P*, and in Syriac as «»i©: 
comp. ZDMG. xxxiv. 568, 766. B'''K3 is the older form of the Syr. 
A«^ evil: comp. C''N3 to be evil in the Targums, Gen. 21, 11, and 
often, Nsr^n (emph.) evil. JTi^y and HIOK are the usual Aram, forms 
of 3 fern. pf. ''If'j? must correspond to what is usually written in 
Aram, as ""iflp (see Dan. 3, 8. 6, 25) ; in Mandaic, however, the root 
is written p3 ; and comp. Syr. ^^-a3 = Heb. HE'i?, and Mand. NtaW'ia 
= )fcl*,(ais = Heb. ^?^p. The term will be used here in the derived 
sense of ' calumny ' (though this explanation is not free from objec- 
tion) ^ non cannot mean perfect (ncri) ' because adjectives of this 
form are very rarely derived from verbs y"y (the Aram, form is 
o-ocr*^), and because, as the subj. of mox, we should expect the 
emphatic nnon. If nDn = Syr. ^»r=Heb. DB', as in Ezr. 5, 17. 
6, I. 6. 12, it must mean there, yonder, the speaker being conceived 
as in the world beyond the grave, and therefore referring to this 
earthly life as " yonder." This seems, however, rather forced : and 
it is perhaps better to adopt Lagarde's suggestion that nDn = Syr. 
yjol^.x) (rad. Y^l) " ever" ' (Dr. Wright). The word must be allowed 

^ See the Glossaries of Sayce-Cowley, Aramaic Papyri discovered at Assuan 
(1906), and Sachau, Aramdische Papyrus aiis . . . Elephantitie (191 1). It is 
also the form found in the old Aramaic of Zinjirli and Nineveh, and in that of 
Babylon, Tema, and even Cilicia. See the particulars and references given in 
LOT? S04, 515- 

'^ From ND yn^O scibile quid (cf. VIJ)?, knowledge, from VT, Dan. 5, 12) ; 
Fleischer, in Levy's Chald. WSrterb. ii. 567 ; '^'6\^^t,Maiiddische Gramm., 186. 

* Now (191 2) attested as early as B.C. 407 and 419 (^Sachau, 2, 14; 6, 7), if 
not as B.C. 510 (Sachau, 52, 11 : see p. 185), and also occurring elsewhere in 
Egyptian Aramaic (see Sachau's Glossary, p. 285), and in Nabataean (Cooke, 
NSI. 94, 5, of the 1st cent. a.d.). Also in the pi. XnoynJtD, Sachau, 2, 12. 3, 11. 

* So in the Palmyrene Tariff Inscription of A.D. 137, NSI. 147, i. 5 J1?*1J3; 8, 9 
XOynO; ii./^4oDi;n?D. 

' Lagarde, Symmicta, ii. p. 61 f. 

^ Comp. "^^aXj, JuJlX, »ma«*.,^.aXo, ;-.tJ3, ^*o», Ui*is», by the side of 
b"1, TU, nV, 7pj "\pj "|lj pi (Lagarde, Anmcrkungen zur griech, Obers. der 
Proverbien, 1863, on 4, 3''). 

xiv Introduction 

to be uncertain. 3. Dli^. i», as Dan. 2, 6, and often, po, i.e. |?P. 
The expression Receive water may be illustrated from Greek Inscrip- 
tions^; and the representation of the bestowal of water upon the 
dead is common on Egyptian monuments. 4. TiyDJ (which admits 
of no explanation) is supposed to be an error of the stone-cutter for 
"Tl^V? 'fny pleasant, delightful one (cf. 2 Sam. i, 26. Cant. 7, 7). 
n^Dn=)^« the pious. At the end n»\bl^ (or ""in) ""in may be plausibly 
supplied : some have thought that traces of these letters are even 
discernible on the stone. The language of the Inscription is almost 
pure Aramaic : a Hebrew (or Phoenician) element is, however, present 
in tJ'"'N and '•np (np^) ^ 

The date of this Inscription is not perfectly certain : but it belongs 
probably to the fourth cent. b.c. An earlier type of the Egyptian 
Aramaic character, dating from b.c. 482, is exhibited on the stele 
of Saqqarah (2 miles NW. of Memphis), found in 1877'; the stele of 
Carpentras has been preferred for reproduction here, as the characters 
(in the photograph) are more distinct. Observe that the upper part 
of the 3, *1, 1, and y is open : this is the first stage in the formation of 
the later square character, which is ultimately produced, in the case 
of these letters, by the disappearance of the two parallel lines at the 
top of 3, 1, n, and by the addition of a tail to the y. (These letters 
are formed similarly on the Saqqarah stele.) The stroke at the upper 
right-hand corner of the X is almost, if not quite, separated from the 
transverse stroke which forms the body of the letter : this is a similar 
change in the direction of the later form of the character*. The two 

' Boeckh, Corp. Inscr. Grace. 6562 : ©(eofs) '^{ara^Qovioii). Avf>i]\ia npoaoScii 
AioaKovpiSrjs avrjp ttj tavTov ffw^io) \pT)ffTOTaTTj Kal yXvKVTciTr} fj-veias X"P"'- 
(v\pvxei, Kvpia, Kal 8oi(t]) croi 6 'Oaipis to v|;vxpov ti5(op. The same wish, id. 6717. 

^ Both now (1912) known to occur frequently in Egyptian Aramaic: see the 
Glossaries in Sayce-Cowley and Sachan. 

' Plate LXIII in the Palaeographical Society's Volume ; Lidzbarski, Plate 
XXVIII. I (drawn by the author) : cf. the transcription, with notes, in NS/. 
No. 71. The Inscription is dated the 4th year of Xerxes ( =B. c. 482) : the name 
Xerxes is written CjnX^tiTl HsIiiarsJi (Pers. Khs/iaydrsJid), as regularly in . 
Egyptian Aramaic (see the Glossaries in Sayce-Cowley and Sachau). 

* The form of the K (as of many of the other letters) in Palmyrene is, however, 
the one which approaches most closely to the square type : see Fig. 1 1 below, and 
the Tables in Cooke or Lidzbarski. 

§ I. Egyptian Aramaic Inscriptions xv 

lower horizontal strokes of the old n are merged in one, which however 
is separated from the perpendicular stroke, and hangs down from the 
upper horizontal stroke, thus anticipating the form ultimately assumed 
by the letter. 1 and T have both nearly assumed the modern form, 
n appears (as on the Saqqarah stele) with only a single horizontal 
bar : the bar, if a little lowered, produces H, H, if a little raised, n. 
On the stone of Mesha' (as in the Inscriptions figured above) ■• 
appears composed of four distinct strokes (like Z with two parallel 
strokes on the left at the top): here the four strokes are crumpled 
up so as to form a sort of triangle, which, when reduced in size, 
becomes the modern V In the stele of Saqqarah, the '' appears still 
in its old form. The two diverging lines towards the top of the 3, 
on the left, which still appear on the Saqqarah stele, become a single 
line, turned up at the end, which in the Papyri becomes in its turn 
a single thick line. D exhibits a modification which is difficult to 
describe, but which, when the tail, as happens afterwards, is curled 
round to the left, produces an evident approximation to the modern 
form of the letter \ "i scarcely differs from 1 except by having 
a longer tail. ^ has been modified, and approaches the modern type : 
almost the same form appears on the stele of Saqqarah. n is no 
longer a complete cross : the horizontal cross-line is confined to the 
right-hand side of the letter, and is deflected downwards : by the 
further prolongation of this deflection, and the accompanying reduction 
of the upper part of the perpendicular stroke, the modern n is 
produced. ^, D, J, S, are not materially changed, shewing, as was 
said, that the transition to the square character was gradual, and not 
accomplished for all the letters at the same time. The words are 
separated, not by dots, but by small spaces. 

In Papyri, the softer material, written upon by a reed-pen, led 
naturally to the production of more cursive characters. Here (Plate IV) 
is part of an Inscription written on a Papyrus discovered in 1907-8, 
at Elephantine, the ancient Yeb, at the extreme south of Egypt, just 
below the First Cataract: it is dated in the 2nd year of Xerxes 

^ Cf. Lidzbarski, p. 191 ; and see Plates XLV, cols. 6-25, XLVI, 11 a, cols. 2, 6. 

icvi Introduction 

(b.c. 484), and is consequently two years older than the Saqqarah 
stele ^ Transliterated into square characters, it reads : — 

n |nj3 K:mN nji niddd pTia 1 1 

J"- KIVIK nSD Dipl XD^O IT-S 12 

pTiD n n^N Nnaab ^310^ p^^y 13 

. . . NIVIJn nSD Dipi N3^JD H^n p:o3 "I^ 14 

T fiD3 til itrna noa 1^ sim N^mx 15 

ND^'D nu n {Disn d^k' djxi xn^x 16 

xnuya xijonn ny nnso^ d^b' njx |^ 17 
nx^nx DD ^y ye^in ana 18 
The Inscription (taking into account the part not here reproduced) 
is a contract between two Jews of the military colony at Elephantine 
and a dealer to supply provisions for two ' hundreds ' (companies) of 
the garrison; and the passage quoted deals with the payment for 
what has been supplied : but the words lost at the ends of the lines 
make it impossible to give a continuous translation. The parts 
which remain may be rendered as follows : — 

II written (i.e. named) in this deed. We will give . . . 

12. the house of the king (=the government), and before the scribes 
of the treasury . . . 

13. by our hand (= through us) to bring to these men who are 

written (named) [in this deed] . . . 

14. to thee by number {or by mna's) in the house of the king, and 

before the scribes of the tr[easury] . . . 

15. We shall owe thee loo karashas^ of silver, silver of ... . 

16. the god. And thou hast authority over (a charge upon) our 

salary, which the house of the king [gives] 

17. to us; thou hast authority to take (it) until thou art fully paid for 

the corn. 

18. Hoshea' has written (this deed) at the mouth (dictation) of Ahiab. 
13. \>2\0, inf. Qal from hy, which occurs in these Papyri in a trans. 

sense (1. 9 ; 42, 17. 43 (i), 4 -jn'^a^ '^:h2 bring me to thy house). In Bibl. 

' Sachau, Aramaische Papyrus und Ostraka aus einer jiidischen Militdr-Kolonie 
zu Elephantine (191 1), No. 25 (p. 99). 

' A Persian weight, equal to 10 shekels (Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, ill. 76, 130). 

Plate IV 







^ ^"^ 


";-'*^<- ■'%*"" jr*^ 5, 

IT' , '^ 



^- ^' *> f^ 5.rJ^ 

:J^'- 4r /■■■ iF*>.j-'* 

■ ^ ' ■■•' ^'^ •'■■" IT" 


^ 2 

Ph CI. 

^.li' ■ .^^T'-r ',;^:>'m^ 

F'ace page xvi] 

Plate V 


'*^v|?Hh^:rn>^i<' «ii 

^ y^^ t^^|>' |y^4 44( «^^^^ ^ 


Egyptian Arajiaic Papyrus 

Reproduced, by permission, from Plate XXVI of the Facsimiles of Manuscripts 
and Inscriptions published by the Palaeographical Society. 

[Face page xvii 

§ I. Egyptian Aramaic Inscriptions xvii 

Aram., Tgg., and Syr., only the Aphel, ^?'n, ^^i^'^, '%a^T. n^X, the 
form in Egyptian Nabataean and Cappadocian Aramaic, Jer, lo, ii, 
Ezr. 5, 15 Kt., for the Biblical Aram, and Targumic \\\^: see Lex. 
io8o^ LOT} 255;/. 15. IK'ns, C"I3\ as the name of a weight, 
occurs often besides in these Inscriptions. 16. \y>^, i.e. tS*?"^ Ezr. 
4, 20. Y, 24 al. {Lex. 1115^). DID, see Sayce-Cowley, L 6, P3 
(=Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, ii. 224, 6. 237, 3). The word may mean 
properly a portion or measure of food (Sachau, p. 52 : cf. Uo»3 = 
(TLTOfjieTpiov Luke 12, 42, PS. col. 3279; and Sachau, Pap. 36 (Taf. 
32), 8). 17. N^'rsnn, see Sachau, Pap. 28 (Taf. 28-9), 11. 17. 
18. D3 bv, so Sayce-Cowley, L 16. Cf. in Heb. Jer. 36, 4 "ini Sna^l 
i.T»n> ^. 6. 17. 18. 

As was remarked above, the differences from the Carpentras script 
are due mainly to the more yielding nature of the material used for 
producing the characters. Instead of the sharply cut characters incised 
on the Carpentras stele, the strokes, especially the horizontal and 
slanting ones, are thick; and those lines which are straight in the 
stele shew a tendency to curve. And in 3, 1, 3, 1, the part open 
at the top almost disappears owing to a single thick stroke taking 
its place : this stroke ultimately becomes the top line of these letters 
in the square form. 

The following (Plate V) is a specimen of the Egyptian Aramaic 
script on a fragment of Papyrus now in the British Museum, belong- 
ing to the late Ptolemaic or Roman period ^ Here is a transliteration 
of the Inscription { = CIS. II. i. 145 B=A'^/. No. 76 B):— 

Vi2^) N3^D n ^ Nnnon bv ^22^ i 

. . . NDb?D njy nnN in trjis 12 2 

. yi irza n3^d n n''!??o k^jis "i3 3 

. . m ib^] 3103 nnn ion rh^ip) 4 

NDJK' XT3 n^3K^ n N^c^i "j^ I^n> n 5 

* Read incorrectly by Sayce-Cowley (A 7 al.) 5^33. See Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, 
iii. 76. 

* Plate XXVI in the Palaeographical Society's Volume. 

? So De Vogiie in CIS. II. i. 145 B. In the Palaeographical Society's Volume, 
the word is transliterated N3n3n 

xviii Introduction 

^i?^t^1 hxK' linn'' ^b y^-\)\ i^n3 .... 6 

VJM Nsijtt ^ai^N fjy tr . . . . 7 

I.e. I. ... for my sons according to the testimony of the king, and 
he heard ... 

2. . . . the son of Punsh, he delayed (?). The king answered 

3. . . . the son of Punsh the words which the king had spoken, and . . . 

4. . . . thou didst kill them. Mayest thou go with the sword of thy 

strength, and .... 

5 and the captives which thou hast taken this year 

6 in them ; and thy bones shall not descend into She'ol, and thy 


7 on the thousands of the king .... 

The text, as is evident, is much mutilated. The subject appears to 
be a tale, ' composed either by a heathen Aramaean, who was hostile 
to the Egyptian religion ^, or by an Egyptian Jew as a Haggadah on 
Ex. I, — more probably the latter.' The language is Aramaic, tinged 
(like the Carpentras Inscription) with Hebrew or Phoenician. 2. 
N3^D njy, cf. Dan. 2, 5. 8. 20 etc. 4. ^isn them, as Ezr. 4, 10. 23 etc. 
^nn cf. T]n) Ezr. 5, 5. 5. Nf (fern.), as Sachau 2, 17 NnB^'N'n NT. 6^ 
NI NnJC, Re'pert. d'tpigr. S/m. i. 247 NT NnT-a ; =Bibl. Aram. NT 
{Lex. 1086' ) : cf. ^T and '^\ p. xii bottom. 6. ^)^ those, as Dan. 
3, 12 etc. iinni from nnj, the common Aram, word for^c dotvn. 

The characters are in general very similar to. those of Plate III ; 
but, in so far as there is a difference, they have approached nearer 
to the square type. The n assumes a form more resembling the 
square n. The tail of the D shews a tendency to curl round to the 
left, and the whole letter approximates to the modern form. In 
the same way the right-hand stroke of the n is longer, and curls 
round, so that the letter, especially the one in "jnn (1. 4), closely 
resembles the square n. The 3 (notice 11. 4 "jnn, 6 "I''Dn:) is almost 
exactly like the square final "j. The square form of J is produced 
by the stroke on the left being gradually brought lower down : see 

^ There is an allusion to the * Egyptian gods' in the first column of the Papyrns 
published as Plate XXV of the same Volume (Cooke, NSI. 76 A). 

§ I. Transition to the Square Character xix 

col. 13 in GK. ; the Inscription "IH DHD 'Boundary of Gezer' from 
Gezer (Lidzbarski, Plate XLVI, II a, col. 3), and the Palmyrene J 
{tbtd. Plate XLV, cols. 10, 13; Cooke, Plate XIV, cols. 6, 7, 9). 

The gradual change of script can also be well studied in the Table 
in Gesenius-Kautzsch (ed. 19 10). From this it appears at once that 
the characters of Mesha"s Inscription {c. 840 b.c.) and those of 
Zinjirli, near Aleppo, of about a century later, are practically identical 
— only the 2, for instance, being in the latter more curved at the top 
than in the former. In the Phoen, and Hebrew characters from the 
ninth to the first cent, b.c (cols. 2-6) there is not any great change: 
the marked changes occur in the Aramaic types, from the eighth to the 
third cent, b.c; and the earliest examples of the square Hebrew 
character (col. 14) are developed most immediately, not from the 
Hebrew series (cols. 3-6), but from the Aramaic series (cols. n-13). 
It further appears from this Table that, of the 'final' characters, 7, |, C], y 
are really the older, more original forms of the letters in question : 
in the middle of a word, in cursive writing, the tail was curved round 
to the left, producing the medial forms 3, 3, D, V ; at the end of 
a word, where there was a natural break, the original long perpen- 
dicular line remained. The final D, on the other hand, is not an 
original form : it arises from the later form of the D being closed 
up on the left (see col. 14; and comp. Lidzbarski, Plate XLVI, II a, 
cf. XLV, cols. 20-25)'. 

From the immediate neighbourhood of Palestine an early example 
of the Aramaic transition-alphabet is afforded by an Inscription, con- 
sisting of a single word, found at 'Araq el-Emir (' Cliff of the Prince '), 
in the country of the ancient Ammonites, 9 miles NW. of Heshbon ». 
Here (Jos. Ant. xii. 4. 11) Hyrcanus, grandson of Tobias, and great- 
nephew of the High Priest Onias II, being persecuted by his brothers, 
found himself a retreat among the hills (b.c 183-176), where he built 
a stronghold, one feature of which consisted in a series of fifteen 

See, for further particulars on the gradual evolution of the square characters, 
Lidzbarski, p, 175 ff. (Phoenician), p. 183 ff. (older Heb.), p. 186 ff. (Aram.), 
pp. 189-192 (square Hebrew) ; and the three Tables at the end of Lis Ailas. 

^ See Socin's Paldsthia u. Syrkn (in Baedeker's Handbooks), Route 10 (end) ; 
in more recent editions (revised by Benzinger), Route 17. 

XX Introduction 

caves, in two tiers, hollowed out in the side of the rock ^ At the 
right hand of the entrance to two of the caves (Nos. 1 1 and 1 3 in the 
Memoirs) in the lower tier, on the smoothed surface of the rock beside 
No. 13 (Fig. 8), on the unsmoothed surface beside No. 11 (Fig. 9), 
stands the Inscription, in letters nearly eight inches high. 

'^ '\). 


Fig. 9 (B). 

(From the Facsimiles attached 

/T- AT o r.u T.1, I u to Chwolson's Corp. Inscr. 

, (From No. 3S3 of the Photographs ^^^^_ ^^^ {■. 

published by the Palestine Explora- *' ' *' 

lion Fund.) 

From its position, the Inscription cannot well be earlier than the 
period when the caves were constructed, and may, of course, be later. 
It must be read HjniLi ^ The transitional character of the alphabet 
appears in the approximations to the square type : in the 1 without 
the right-hand upper stroke, in the 3 open at the top, and in the "i and 
n approaching the type of Fig. 10. The 13, also, originally a cross 

* See the view of the caves in the Memoirs of the Survey of Eastern Palestine, 
vol. i (1889), opposite p. 72 ; or in G. A. Smith's Jerusalem (1908), ii. 426 (also, 
p. 428, a photograph of the cave with the Inscription A), cf. p. 427 «. 

* The reading has been disputed. De Vogii6 {MManges, 1868, p. 162 f.), and 
Clermont-Ganneau {Researches in Palestine, 1896, ii. 261), both of whom had 
seen and copied the Inscription, read it n^31D. On the. other hand, the Photo- 
graph (Fig. 8), and the reproductions in the Memoirs, p. 76 f., and the Plate 
opposite p. 84, seemed to leave no doubt that the first letter was y ; and so n^2iy 
was adopted in the first edition of the present work, and by Lidzbarski in 1898 
(pp. 117, 190). It appears now, however, from the very complete descriptions 
in the Publications of the Princeton Archaeological Expedition to Syria in 
1904-5 [Division II (Ancient Architecture in Syria), § A (Southern Syria), Part i 
(Ammonitis), pp. 1-28 ('Araq el- Amir); Division III (Inscriptions), § A (Southern 
Syria), Part i (Ammonitis), pp. 1-7 (Hebrew Inscriptions of 'Araq el-Amir), by 
Enno Littmann], Div. Ill, § A, Pt. i, p. 2 (Photos. A and B), that (as stated above) 
there are in fact two inscriptions (cf. Smith, 427 w.), one (A) agreeing with Fig. 8, 
the other (B) agreeing with Fig. 9 (except that the circle of the t3 should be closed at 
the top) : the second can only be read iT'^ID , and this determines the reading of 
the first (in A there are no traces visible, any more than there are in the photograph 
from which Fig. 8 is taken, of a line, like that in B, drawn upwards from the left- 
hand upper-corner; but Littmann expresses it distinctly in his sketch of the 
inscription on the same page). Lidzbarski now accepts rT'J'lD {Ephem. iii. 49). 

§ I. Transition to the Square Character xxi 

enclosed in a circle, shews (in B) a modification, similar to that in 
Egyptian Aramaic and Palmyrene, and approximating to the square 

The next Inscription is that of the B^ne Hezir, above the entrance 
to the so-called Tomb of St. James, situated on the INIount of Olives, 
immediately opposite to the SE. angle of the Temple-area. 

Fig. lo. 

Inscription of the B®ne Hezir. 

(From Chwolson's Corpus Inscriptionum Hebraicamm, No. 6. Cf. NSI. 

No. 148 A.) 

pnr pyctr mi.T nryi'' .Tjn -iry^s^ 3[3]:^'r^^1 '\i\>\j\'\ ht 
.Tjn ^jn -iryijxi ^\yh\\ ... 2 ... p fjov ^J3 

inn >j3r3 .... 

I. e. This is the tomb and the resting-place for Eleazar, Hanniah, 

Yo'ezer, Yehudah, Simeon, Yohanan, 
The sons of Yoseph, the son of ... . . [and for Yojseph and Eleazar, 

the sons of Hanniah, 
.... of the sons (i. e. family) of Hezir. 

Here we observe Hebrew advancing towards the square character. 
A Hezir, ancestor of a priestly family, is mentioned 1 Ch. 24, 15: 
another Hezir, not a priest, but one of the chiefs of the people, is 
named Neh. 10, 21. The date of the Inscription is probably shortly 
before the Christian era. The advance towards the square character 
is very marked. Notice, for instance, the N, the n, the 7, the D, the y, 
the 1 ; and the bar of the n, higher up than in the Egyptian Aramaic. 
Notice also that by the turn to the left given to the lower part of 
the 3, when standing in the middle of a word, a medial and a final 
form of the letter are distinguished (as in pnv at the end of the first 
line) : when ^ follows, this turn is regularly connected with it, giving 
rise to a ligature : the same happens with 3 followed by 3. 1 and T are 

xxii Introduction 

scarcely distinguishable from one another. The first letters of line 3 
are uncertain : they may perhaps be read as rT'a , , . . ' 

The ligature just spoken of is peculiarly common in the Palmyrene 
character. The Palmyrene Inscriptions" are written in a dialect of 
Aramaic ^ and date from b.c. 9 onwards; the character differs from 
the square type only in calligraphical details. A specimen (Fig. 11) 
is given {=NSI. No. 141), for the sake of illustrating the tendency 
of Aramaic on the East, as well as on the West, of Palestine to 
advance in the direction of the square character : — 

Fig. II. 

(From De Vogue's Syria Centrale, 1868, Plate V, No. 30*.) 
■•T n:n xnnp I. e. This tomb is that of 
n lijNn^ -|3 jnjny 'Athinathan, son of Kohilu, which 

■•mja '►ni^y m built over him his sons 

*ni33 pTT) 1^\n3 Kohilu and Hairan, his sons, 

NIT'D *n p ""I of (the family of) the children of Maitha, 

llll "3 111 T\^^ )"I33 nT3 in the month Kanun, in the year 304 

[|133 is written }1J*l] [Seleuc. = B.c. 9]"*. 

^ Other Inscriptions (mostly fragmentary) from approximately the same period, 
may be seen in Chwolson's volume, Nos. 2 ("^13 DnD Boundary [Aram.] of 
Gezer), 3, 4, 5 (Aram., from the Hauran), 7, 8, 9, 10. No. 5 is bilingual, and 
may be found also in De Vogiie, Syrie Centrale, p. 89 : 1132 ""T n"lJ2n ""T HJJ'DJ 
ri?y3 n^nX n? = 'OSaiVaOos 'Avvt}\ov wKoSofiTjaev rijv aTrjKrjv Xa/^pdrjj t^i avrov 

2 See Cooke, NSI. pp. 263-340. 

' Which exhibits some noticeable affinities with the Aramaic of Ezra and Daniel : 
see Sachau, ZDMG. 1883, pp. 564-7 ; A. A. Bevan, A Commentary on Daniel 
(1892), pp. X, 37, 211 ff.; LOT? 504. 

* On the Nabatacan Inscriptions, in which some of the letters, esp. 3^ D^ D, 

§ I. Transition to the Square Character xxiii 

In the following Inscription { = NSI. No. 148 B), from the lintel of 
a door, belonging to a ruined Synagogue at Kefr-Eir'im, a village 
a few miles NW. of Safed in Galilee,' discovered by M. Renan in the 
course of his expedition in Palestine in 1863, the transition to the 
square character may be said to be accomplished : the date may be 
c. 300 A.D. (Renan), or somewhat earlier (Chwolson). 

Fig. 12. 

(From Chwolson's Corpus Inscriptionum Hebraicarum *, No. 17.) 

cvyon nsna Nan nin ^'^^n v:^^ ^ p M^n 

I.e. May there be peace in this place, and in all the places of Israel! 
Yosah the Levite, son of Levi, made this lintel : may blessing come 
upon his works ! 

K'VJJO is evidently an error of the carver for VK'yD : he first omitted 
the B* by accident, and then attached it at the end. Notice in this 
Inscription the close resemblance between 1 and "", which in the 
Inscription of the B^ne Hezir are distinguished by the turn to the left 
— a survival of the primitive form of the letter — at the top of the ^ ; 
also that between 3 and O (cf. p. Ixvii), as well as \he final D. Notice 
also the regular />/<'«« scn'plio. The resemblance of niiT to mm (p. iii) 
in a character such as this will be evident. 

In conclusion, a specimen is given (Plate VI) of a complete 
Phoenician Inscription {-^NSI. No. 4), which may serve as an 
example of the style, as regards character and general appearance, 
in which the autographs of the Old Testament must have been written. 
The Inscription was found at Zidon in 1887, engraved on the base of 
a sarcophagus of black basalt, of Egyptian workmanship, and bearing 

and y approach closely to the square characters, see Cooke, NSI. p. 2i4ff., and, for 
the characters, Plate XIV, Lidzb. Plate XLV. 

^ In the original the Inscription is in one line : it is divided here merely for 
convenience. See Photograph No. 459 of the Palestine Exploration Fund. 

xxiv Introduction 

in front a hieroglyphic Inscription, designed no doubt originally for 
use in Egypt, but diverted from its original purpose and taken to 
Phoenicia in order to receive the remains of a Phoenician prince. 
The contents of the hieroglyphic Inscription bear no relation to those 
of the Phoenician one. Transliterated into square characters, the 
latter reads as follows : — 

p Djnx 1^0 nnncy jna n^nn i^n i 

psa aac' n^^'i i?^ mnc'y jna "iryiCK'N 2 

n ^x ^K T r\^r\ n-'N psn ^^ ons b ns* "o t 3 

jhs '•s P1D3 f^nx ^x 3 jmn ^ni -n^y nns 4 

nan bx ^x r psn n^t^' i^x nb n^^D Din ^531 fin 5 

na DN1 NH nmn nnne-y nayn a jmn ^ni Tii'y n 6 

t:E' nnn ffnn ynr [n]b i[3]"' ^n imn m") ^nby nnan n 7 

nXDI HN 33K'm ^ 8 

I.e. 1. I Tabnith, priest of 'Ashtart, king of the Zidonians, son 

2. of Eshmun'azar, priest of 'Ashtart, king of the Zidonians, lie in 

this coffin : 

3. whoever thou art, (even) any man, that bringest forth this coffin, do not 

4. open my sepulchral chamber, and disquiet me not; for there is 

no image of silver, there is no image of 

5. gold, nor any jewels of?: only myself am lying in this coffin; do 

not o- 

6. -pen my sepulchral chamber, and disquiet me not ; for such an act 

is an abomination unto 'Ashtart ; and if thou at all 

7. openest my chamber, or disquietest me at all, mayest thou have 

no seed among the living under the su- 

8. -n, or resting-place with the Shades. 

The Tabnith who speaks is the father of the Eshmun'azar (II) 
whose long and interesting funereal Inscription^ (22 lines) was found 
in 1855 on the site of the ancient necropolis of Zidon, and who 
describes himself (lines 13-15), as son of Tabnith, king of the 
Zidonians, and of Amm'ashtart, priestess of Ashtart, and grandson 

* It may be found in M. A. Levy's Phonizische Stiidien, i. (1856) ; in Schroder's 
Die Fhon. Sprache (1869), p. 224, with Plate I; CIS. I. i. No. 3 (with facsimiles); 
and elsewhere : most recently in Cooke, NSI. No. 5 (with facsimile, Plate I). 

Plate VI 

o -^. 

a -s 



Face page xxiv] 

§ I. The Inscription of Tabnith xxv 

of Eshmun'azar (I), who is mentioned here as Tabnith's father. 
From the style of the Egyptian ornamentation displayed both by the 
sarcophagus of Tabnith, and also by the related sarcophagus of 
Eshmun'azar II, it is concluded that the date of the Inscription is 
not earlier than the fourth cent, b.c; and as upon other grounds 
it cannot be much later than this, it may be plausibly assigned to 
c. 300 B.c^ The Inscription is of value to the Hebrew student, not 
only on account of its paiaeographical interest, but also on account of 
the illustration which it affords of the language and ideas of the Old 

1. "]3N occurs frequently in Phoenician Inscriptions: it was pro- 
nounced probably 13^ (Schroder, Phon. Spr., p. 143): a final vowel 
is often not represented in Phoenician orthography : comp. below 
T, 3, |T2^n^ On the pronunciation 'Ashlart, see p. 62. 

2. p^? of a coffin, or mummy-case, as Gen. 50, 26. 

3. r, i.e. ] (Heb. ni). So regularly, as JMSI. 9, 3 T nVkTH this gate; 
19, I T n3V0 this pillar; 42, 3 (the sacrificial table from Marseilles) 
T nNt^•D^ this payment; CIS. I. i. 88, 4 I nps!r:n (cf. Cooke, p. 26). 
Observe that I (unhke the Heb. nr) is without the article, although 
the accompanying noun has it : pronounce, therefore, here ). i1fr?3 
(not pN3), as line 3 T pNn.— With 'J1 n^< '•O cf. NSI. 64, 5-6. 65, 8 : 
mx 73 is, however, somewhat awkward. Renan, observing that in 
Eshmun'azar's Inscription there occurs twice the similarly worded 
phrase, line 4 r 2y^n2 n"'x nns)'' ^x DIN' ^21 nabcD ^3 riN •<»]?, line 20 
"Tl^y nns"' ^S* din !'D1 na^r:^ i?3 nx '•Dip, suggests that •'D is an error 
of the stone-cutter for ^d^, which is supposed, on the strength of 
a statement in the Mishnah, Gitliti 4, 7 (nosC' inxn \\1>'i1 HK'yO 
IBnjD ^yx nx Djip in^i-xi? i.e. a man in Zidon said to his wife Djip 
'A curse (upon me), if I do not divorce thee ! '), to have been 
a Phoenician formula of imprecation (see further Cooke, p. 34). 
Render in this case, then : ' My curse (be) with every man, whosoever 

* Ph. Berger in the Revue Archeologique, Juillet 1887, p. 7. 

^ So bX these (p. 34 note), in accordance with the dissyllabic form found in the 
Semitic languages generally, was pronounced in all probability ?SI (in the Poenulus 
V. I, 9 written ily; in an Inscr. from N. Africa, ZDMG. xxix. 240, N7X : Lidz- 
barski, p. 264''). Comp. Cooke, NSI. p. 26. 

xxvi Introduction 

thou art, that bringest forth/ etc. — SJ'X, the Phoenician form of the 
relative, occurring constantly in the Inscriptions, to be pronounced 
probably ish or esh, if not rather as a dissyllable ^^ ^ — pan prob. 
pan or psri; cf. Aram. pS? to go forth, p2K to bring forth, or Heb. 
p''Qn (Is. 58, 10). — ri*N=i:Heb. riK, the mark of the accus, : for the 
vocalization, cf. Arab. GL 

4. ^n^y: comp. in Eshmun'azar's Inscription {NSI. 5), lines 5-6 
>l^ nDt^'D n^y r 33Er02 lony^ ^N1 nee superaedificent lecto huic 
canieram lecti alterius, 10, and 20-21 ly ?K1 Tl^y nns'' ?K D*1N /3 
'D^y. — 1.1?"!'?, comp. T''3"in used of disquieting the spirits of the dead 
in I S. 28, 15. Is. 14, 16. — 3 i.e. ? C*?), as often (Schrod. p. 218 f.; 
Lidzbarski, p. 295): e.g. CIS. 2, 12. 13 i:n 3="1'3? ?.— ""N «^/.- cf. 
p. 49 «f/^. — plN, probably the Greek tiSwAov. 

5. pn, the usual Phoenician word ior gold {NSI 3, 5 ; 24, i yp"nJD 
TN pn this plating of gold; 33, 3. 5 ; CIS. 327, 4-5 pnn !]Db the 
goldsmith); in Hebrew confined to poetry. — D3D prob.=:Aram. JND, 
pi. pJNO, N»3SD._nS2 = ''ri!53. 

6. NH nmn nin::'y nnyn ''d : comp. the very similar use of niyin 
mn'' in Dt. (7, 25 Nin th^n -"^ nayin '•3. 17, i. 18, 12. 22, 5. 
23, 19. 25, 16. 27, i5)and Pr. (3, 32. 1 1, 20. 12, 22 al.). — NH I3nn, NH 
without the art., as T above: so CIS. 2, 22 NH n3^?:it3n that kingdom ; 
166, 3 4 Nn DnSl. On the orthography of NH, see below, p. xxxi. 

7. \)Tf^ T^l, with the inf. Qal, according to the scheme noticed 
on II 20, 18. — p>, i.e. |3^, impf. from 1^3 (see p. 7.%^ footnote ; NSI 
Index, p. 369 ; and the Glossary in Lidzbarski, p. 294). Cf. NSI. 
42, 13 D3n3i' 13'' = Heb. n''jn3^ n\T.— Qjna yit: comp. the corre- 
sponding imprecation in Eshmun'azar's Inscription, lines 8-9 |3^ i^NI 
DJnnn yin p xh and let him (them) not have son or seed in his 

(their) stead; 11-12 t^'^K' nnn n''n3 -iNm ^virh nsi '^■hS c^nty d^ p*" ^k 
(see Is. 37, 31). 

8. DN31 riN 33:^'r01 : comp. ib. line 8 DNDT DS* 232^0 oi? p'' ^S1 : 
33^*0 of a resting-place in the underworld, as Ez. 32, 25: the CNS"! 
as Is. 14, 9. 26, 14. 19. i/'. 88, II. Pr. 2, 18. 9, 18. 21, 16. Job 26, 5t '^. 

' In the Poemilus of Plautus represented by si (V. i, i. 4. 6. 8), and ass (V. 2, 
56 assamar = "IIDN C'X). Comp. Schroder, pp. 162-6. 

^ For further information on the subject of the Phoenician language and 
Phoenician Inscriptions, the reader is referred to M. A. Levy, Phonizische Studien in 

§ 2. Early Hebrew Orthography xxvii 

§ 2. Early Hebrew Orthography. 

Having determined the nature of the old Hebrew character, we 
have next to consider the nature of the old Hebrew orthography. 
Did this differ from that which we find in modern printed texts ? and 
if so, in what respects ? 

I. Division of words. In the Inscription of Mesha' and in the 
Siloam Inscription the words are separated by a point, but in 
Inscriptions on gems and coins and in Phoenician Inscriptions 
generally (see e.g. Plate VI) separations between words are not marked^. 
Whether they were marked (either by points or spaces) in the auto- 
graphs of the OT. cannot be determined with certainty : if they were, 

4 Parts, Breslau, 1856-70; Schroder, Die Phonizische Sprache, Halle, 1869; the 
Corpus htscriptionum Semiticariim, Tom. I (where the Bibliography relating to 
each Inscription is specified in full) ; Cooke, NSI. pp. 18-158; and Lidzbarski, 
N'ordsem. Inscr. pp. 4-83, 493-499 (Bibliography [to 1898]), 204-38S, 500-504 
(Glossary), 389-412 (synopsis of grammatical forms, etc.). The best treatment of 
the relation of Phoenician to Hebrew is to be found in the Essay of Stade in the 
Morgetildndische Forschtmgen (Leipzig, 1875), pp. 179-232. AH these authorities 
may, however, in greater or less degree, be supplemented from Inscriptions that 
have been discovered more recently, and for which search must be made (chiefly) 
in the Repettoire d^ Epigraphie Simitiqtte (from 1900), a supplement, appearing 
from time to time, to the CIS., and in Lidzbarski's Eptiemeris fiir Semitische 
Epigraphik (from 1902), with Glossaries at the end of each volume. 

For further details respecting the history of the West-Semitic alphabets generally, 
and of the Hebrew alphabet in particular (in addition to the works of Levy, 
Chwolson, Madden, Berger, and Lidzbarski, mentioned above), reference may be 
made to Lenormant, Essai stir la propagation de l" Alph. Phhiicien dans I'anc. 
monde, 1S72-3 ; Stade's Lelubiuh, pp. 23-34; Wellhausen's edition of Bleek's 
Einleiiung, ed. 1878, p. 626 ff. ; ed. 1886, p. 580 ff. ; De Vogiie, Melanges d Ar- 
cheologie Orientale (1868), especially pp. 141-178, ' L' Alphabet Arameen et 
r Alphabet H^braique; ' Isaac Taylor's History of the Alphabet, Chaps. IV, V; 
S. A. Cook's study, mentioned above (p. x), in the PEFQS. 1909, pp. 284-309 ; 
the other Facsimiles of Semitic Inscriptions contained in the Palaeographical 
Society's Volume ; Euting's Nabatdische Inschriften (1885) ; the Plates in the 
Corpus Inscriptiomim Semiticarum ; and Neubauer's Facsimiles of Hebrew 
Manuscripts, with Transcriptions, Oxford, 1 886. 

' In many of the older Aramaic Inscriptions also the words are separated by a 
point : in the Papyri they are usually separated by a space. See further Lidzb., 
p. 202 f. A perpendicular line, seemingly a clause-separator, occurs twice in the 
Gezer Inscription (11. i. a). 

xxviii Introduction 

some irregularity and neglect must have been shewn in the observance 
of them : for the existing MT. contains instances of almost certainly 
incorrect division of words (a) ; and the LXX frequently presuppose 
a different division from that in MT. {b), which (whether right or 
wrong) could scarcely have arisen had the separation of words been 
marked distinctly. It is probable, however, that before the Massoretic 
text was definitely fixed, the division of words had been generally 
estabhshed, and the distinction made between the medial and final 
forms of 3, », 3, D, V (above, p. xix) : for the Massorites, instead of 
altering in the text what they view as a wrong division of words, leave 
the text as it is, and only direct the reader to substitute the correct 
division ; this implies that at the time when notes such as those 
referred to were added, the division of words found in the ^TlD was 
regarded as definitely settled (<r). 
(a) Gen. 49, 19-20 "lEJ'NO : 3py leg. "1K>N :D3|?J?. 

2 S. 21, I cj^nn n^3-^Ni 1. D'-m nh'-n-^Ni. 
Is. 17, 6 v^^'s^ n^syon 1. nnan •'Dyoa. 

Jer. 15, 10 ''Jl^i'pn n^3 (a grammatical monstriwi) 1. ""W?!? Dp?3. 

22, 14 pSD] ^JOn 1? yipl (another grammadcal anomaly) 
1, I'iSD VJlbn 1^ J)np1. 

23, 33 XE^-np-ns 1. NE'sn Dnx (so LXX, Vulg.). 
Ez. 43, 13 HDNn p''m 1. ni3K n'P'm. 

Hos. 6, 5 N^f^ nis T^stj'ci 1. : n^: I'l^'? "t^efw (so LXX, Pesh. 

^. 25, 17 ^'h'^r\ U^nnn 1. ^J^^jfm 3'nnn (see the Commentators). 
42, 6-7 \l^s* .♦Vis myiti'^ 1. :\-|^Nl '•^S niyiB''' (so LXX, Pesh. : 

comp. V. 12. i/.. 43, 5). 
73, 4 DDID^ 1. cri Srh (so Ew. Hitz. Del. etc.). 

(U) Nu. 24,22 '19'"'^ ri^T- I'eoo-cria, 7ravoupytas='"'9']V 'i^- 
I S. I, I fjl^-p: eV Nao-ety8=:TVn. 

14, 21 non D31 3^3D : dveo-rpdcfirja-av kol avT0i = iM2n D3 1D3D. 

20, 40 N''3n "I?: TTopevov, €lo■eA^e = ^^i3 PIDp. 
I Ch. 17, lob •]^-n:N1 : KOL av^rjo-w (Te = '\?'^y^). . 
Jer. 5, 6 ni3"iy 3XT : XvKo<i cws twv otK;iaiv=n'2"ny 3NT. 

9, 4 <?«<f-5 nono "linn nnac* : is^j : (ow) Ste'XiTrov tov eVi- 

(TTpeij/ai. TOKOS €7rt TdKU):="]in3 'Jjn J3K' INPJ. 

§ 2. Early Hebrew Orthography xxix 

17, II ab) "i^i'y iTj'y : TToiwv ttAovtoi/ avToO ov=iO 'nfv ntyy. 

31, 8 "^iV D?: ev eopT^ = nyin2. 

46, 15 S]nDJ yniD : Sta n' €(f>vy€v (aTro o-ot') 6 * Atti? ; = UHD 

fin DJ. 

Hos. II, 2 Dn^iStO : Ik TvpocnliiTov {xov auTot^QH ^??^- 

Zeph. 3, 19 ^jyo'^a-nx : ev a-ol Iv^Kiv (TOV (as though ^R5< 

Zech. II, 7 \*3y (3?: ets tt/v Xavaavrriv = ''jyJ37. 

«/^. 4, 3 n»i53^ naS: /SapvKapSioi ; iva Ti=nD^ 3.^ ""'H??. 

44, 5 niV D^^^«: 6 0eos /u.ov, 6 eVT£AAo>evos=''1.^^9 ''-''■^• 

106, 7 DJ'-'y: dva^atVovT£s=Cl7y. 
Pr. 13, 14 ni» "•"k^piOO: iiTTo TraytSos ^avcrTat=niO^ C'pina. 

14, 7 nyn^-^ai : o-n-Xa 8k ato-^'^o-cwsr^nyn \pDi. 

27, 9 CSJTlVyO inyT pnOI: KaTapprjywTat 8e vtto avp-TTTUi- 
Job 40, 19 (LXX 14) mn C'V ItJ'yn : Treironqp.ivov lyKaTairaC- 

^o-^at^B-pnb'f) ^VK'yn (^. 104, 26). 
See also i/'. 76, 7. Jer. 6, 9. 23, cited below, pp. Ixv, Ixvi ; Gen. 
28, 19 OvXa/xfiavs (for ])b D^lNl). Jud. i8, 29 OvAa/^ais (for C^^ D^INl) ; 
and the notes on I i, 24. 2, 13. 21, 7. 

(f) a Jer. 6, 29 Dn:^•NO: Dn t:'ND np. 
j/^. 55, 16 mo-cv nin "•tr: 'p. 
Job 38, I myDnjO: nnyipri |r? 'p. 

40, 6 myDJKJ : iTiyp jp 'p. 
Neh. 2, 13 D-i'nscn: c^-nD Dn 'p. 

1 Ch. 9, 4 pD •'ja fD"':^ p : pD 'Ja fD 'J3 p 'p. 
/? La. 4, 3 D>jy ^d ; D^3y>3 'p. 

2 Ch. 34, 6 Dn^nn nna : Dn^nhina 'p. 

y 2 S. 5, 2 "'ar:ni N'':;ra nn''\n : '^aroni ^''^iion n'»\n 'p. 
21, 12 D''n:r^Dn nu: D''nc'^3 ni:K' 'p. 
Ez. 42, 9 n^sn nis'j'^ nnnnr:i : n^xn niD'^^n nnnoi 'p. 
Job 38, 12 iDipo in'^ nnyT": ic'ipD nne^n r)y"n^ 'p. 
Ezra 4, 12 l^'^b^C'N' nic'l: ^i^^Jj?"^ sniB'1 'p. 

XXX Introduction 

However, as the need of a re-division of words is comparatively 
unfrequent, it may perhaps be inferred that in old Hebrew MSS. 
the divisions between words were not regularly unmarked ^ 

2. The pletia scriptio was rare. Thus in Mesha' 's Inscription the 
V of the plural is regularly not expressed (line 2 \^\)^ thirty: 4 \:h^r\ 
(p. Ixxxix); 5 pn ;»"•, i.e. |31 |0J many days; 16 p3a, i.e. H?? men): 
we have also 10. 13. 20 tTN, 11 "ip for what in MT. would be ^^^, 
"'"'i? : further (attaching the points, to avoid repetition) i 3Xb, 4 "'jyK'n 
saved me, 27 ''^33, D"in .• and even 23. 27. 30 na, 7 nn3, for 0*2, nri*3 
(once 25 nri"'52); the </«a/j, 15 Dinvn (in MT. Dn;!?-?), 20 |nND /w<> 
hundred, 30 |n^31 nz (Jer. 48, 22 Qiob^'n n"'3), 31 pim (Isa. 15, 5 
D*:'i"in). Even N is sometimes omitted, not merely in nrriNI 11. 20 
(i.e. '"^THf^J, i^^nNI), 24 -ir:Ki (">?^51), where the radical N following the 
prefix of I ps. sg. of the imperfect is dispensed with as in Hebrew, but 
in iT<J>l 20 = nt:'Nl its chief {/). 

Similarly in the Siloam Inscription we find 2. 4 {j'N (i.e. t^''i<), 
2 nr:N (i.e. ntes), 3 -iva ("i^2?3), p^o (po'P), 4- 6 Damn (D?>"nn), 
6 "ivn ("i12fn) J and even (where the 1 is radical) 2 ^p (so rarely in 
MT. : usually i^ip), 3 D'a (i.e. DV3— never D^ in MT.). We find, 
however, beside these 'defective' forms i. 2 liya ("liV2j, 5 NXion, 
and 6 B'wS"!. 

Perhaps the most remarkable case of the defectiva scriptio is that of 
the pron. of 3 sing., which is twice on Mesha"s Inscription (in the 
masculine) written NH (6 NH DJ "lON^I; 27 t«n Din O). In Phoenician 
Inscriptions, the same orthography is found regularly with both 
genders -': it appears, therefore, that, while NH was all that was written, 
the context was regarded as a sufficient guide to enable the reader 
to pronounce it correctly hti or hi\ according as the reference was 
to a masc. or fem. antecedent. (The alternative supposition that hu^ 
was used for both genders, is excluded by the fact that all other 
Semitic languages have a feminine with yod, which obliges us to 

* Comp. further (with reserve) Perles, Analekten (1895), p. 35 ff. 

2 Cooke, NSI. 3, 9 NH pnif 1^0 he was a just king, 13 NH naxb?:) that work ; 
6, 10 Nil DIX that man, 11 NH n^^JSD that kingdom; 27, 2 (254 B. c.) and CIS. 
I. i. 94, 2 nt^ NH that year; NSI. 44, h 4 NH CH^n ; and in the Inscription of 
Tabnith (p. xxiv), line 6. bee Lidzbaraki, p. 257. 

§ 2. Early Hebrew Orthography xxxi 

suppose that the double form was already possessed by the ancestors 
of the different Semitic nations when they still lived together in a 
common home^) 

It may be inferred that the plena scriptio was introduced gradually, 
though, so far as N is concerned, the instances of its omission, where 
it is required by the etymology, are so exceptional, that it was probably 
in use, as a rule, from the beginning. In the case of 1 and » there is 
abundant evidence that the LXX translated from MSS., in which 
it was not yet generally introduced ; for in passages where it is found 
in MT. they constantly do not recognize it. Thus, to take but a few 
examples out of many — 

1 S. 12, 7 """^ mpn^' ?3 DN : T^v Tracrav SiKaioa-vvrjv K. =:"''"' J^i^*IV. 

8 D"I2'''J"'1 : Kat /caTw/cio-ev airous=0?''^"'^- 
1 8, 27 DISPCil : A, Luc. kol €7rXiypwo-ev avTa.<;=^^^^^''\ 
19, 5 n-'NI: (ttSs 'la-parjX) et8oi/=riNn or ri^^'J (construction as 
17, 21). 

20, 26 end '^)^\l2 : KeKa6dptaTai^~^']^. 

21, 14 (13 LXX)nnV1: Kareppet^TJ'.!. 

23, 25 mpi:^nDri y^D : TreVpa 17 /x£/3to-^£to-a=rip?nDn ybo, 

27, 8 y^i^^ rin"j'^ T]zh: jSov ^ y^ KaTa)/<erTo=pi«n r]2f^ mn. 

2 S. 7, I v"n^3n : KareKXripovofJi-qcrev avTov=^>^^^<}. 

Jer. 6, 15 Dv£33 I7DV TrcaovvTaL iv rfj TTTwaei avTU}V=^^^^^ vS\ 
23 ncn^D? C^{<3 : ws TTvp (*'^^?) €ts TToXefJiov. 
29 1pn3 N? D^y^l : TTOvrjpta avT(t)V ovK iraKr)^^^^ ^7 ^VIV 

12, 15 D"'n2''w^'m : KOL KaTOlKtU) aVTOV^=^'^^^^'^]. 

17, 25 D^D1D31 : KOL "ttttois avr wv^^OD^DIl^. 

32 (39), 5 ^.?^'': cto-cAcuo-erai^'^.?.''. (JlN being disregarded). 

50 (27), 16 y"li^: (nrepfjia=V'i}, (in spite of the parallel Kaxc'xoj'Ta 


51 (28), 59 nm:o -i:r: apx^v Swpwv^nmo nb*. 

^ The view formerly held that the epicene NIH was an archaism in Hebrew, 
cannot, in the light of these facts, be any longer sustained: Hebrew must have 
possessed the double form from the beginning. Cf. Noldeke, ZDMG. 1866, 
p. 458 f. ; 1878, p. 594; Delitzsch, Comm. on Genesis (Engl. Tr.), i. pp. 42 f., 50 ; 
Wright, Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages (1890), p. 104. 

xxxii Introduction 

Ezek. 7, 24 Ciy pN3 : to ^pvayfxa t^s io-;i(i;os avTOJV = Djy p'*^ (comp. 
24, 21). 
I3» ^3 rinyD ni~l : irvor]v l^aipova-av=^^'y9P '^^"*- 
42, 16-17 (similarly 17-18) TlD :2''3D: Kai eirea-Tpcij/e . . , koX 
8i€fxiTpr}(Te i.e. TlO -^-? (so most moderns: comp. v. 
19 MT.). 
i}/. 5 title nvTI^rrbx : v-n-kp T^s KX77povo/ioiJcn7S=^^5^2n~?S. 
58, 12 CCDC: 6 KptVwj/ avroi's=D(?SC'. 
104, 17 CCm t T^yetrai atira)V = ^'^^''3. 
107, 17 D^^IN: avT^XajieTo avTwv=D>]'5 or C)?*'<^ 
Job 19, 18 Dv''iy: €ts Tov attovar^nbiy^ 

3. The suffix of 3 sg. masc. was written n- instead of V, as is 
normally the case in MT. The original form of this suffix was in-, 
as seen still in l-T'Si, and in derivatives of r\"b verbs as ini?.f P, insp, etc.: 
also in such verbal forms as ^nn^K^, inbwv:, in^rin2, ^n^^ny:, in:n, 
innnnN, in??^^^ (Stade, §§ 345, 628), and the form -hu is used 
regularly in Arabic ; but in the majority of cases a contraction takes 
place, the aspirate being rejected, and a-hu, for instance, becoming 
first ati and ultimately 0. At first, however, the orthography was not 
altered, H- remained, though \i followed the S, and in fact was only 
a sign of the final long vowel : in the end, however, V was mostly 
substituted for it. Mesha' still writes uniformly H- ; e.g. (adding the 
points) nxisa, nba, nhna, na, nb'"):'"!, etc. : on the Siloam Inscription, 
on the contrary, the examples which occur, viz. ST^. thrice, have i-. 
In MT., though in the vast majority of cases the contracted suffix is 
written V, there occur a number of instances in which n- has been 
suffered to remain, testifying (in the light of the cognate dialects) 
to a previous general prevalence of this form: viz. Gen. 9, 21. 12, 8. 
13, 3- 35. 21 n^HN; 49, II HTy and nrao ; Ex. 22, 4 nvyn; 26- 
nrnD3; Ex. 32, 17 ny-i3; 25 ny"!S; Lev. 23, 13 nro:; Nu. 10, 36 

1 As though from a verb ^JIX or ij^N : cLip. 22, i n^"'N avriXrixpis ; 20 TllTS 
Po-qeHCi IJ.0V ; 88,5 b"'N PN ul3orj9T]Tos ; Syr. JL/ Itelp, succour, Ephr. i. 398 al. 

2 Yet in some cases the plena scriptio must have been in use : Jud. 9, 37 D''TT' 
Kara^alvwv Kara OaXaaaav (□'• T!"") ; Jer. 22, 20 DHDyD els to ntpav rrjs GaXaaar^s 

§ 2. Early Hebrew Orthography xxxiii 

nn33^; 23, 8 n3i?; Dt. 34, 7 nh^; jos. n, 16 nh^iB'^; Jud. 9, 49 
nbVc'; 2 Ki. 6, 10 nn^ntn; 9, 25 nb^Ji;^; 19, 23 nsp (is. 37, 24 i^^i?); 
20, 13 (=Is.39, 2) nhb2: jer. 2, 3 nhNun ; 17, 24 nn; 22, i8t>nnn; 
Ez. 12, 14 nn]j;; 31, 18. 32, 31. 32. 39, II all niinn; 48, 8 (so 3?, 
Kittel, but not Baer and Ginsburg). 15 etid. 21 end nbin ; 18 nhNinn ; 
Hab. 3, 4 n^y; ^. 10, 9. 27, 5 n3D3; 42, 9 ni^K^; Dan. 11, 10 myo; 
and the eighteen (seventeen) cases of n?3 quoted on II 2, 9 ^ The 
non-recognition of this form of the suffix has sometimes, as in i S. 
14, 27 (see note). 2 S. 21, i (see note). Is. 30, 33 (rd. i^n^nrp). Ez. 
43. 13 (see p. xxviii), led to error in MT. Comp. also Gen. 49, 10 in 
the Versions ij^f). The retention of the form in the instances cited 
is probably due to accident : it cannot be said to occur more frequently 
in passages that are (presumably) ancient than in others ; thus in 
Gen. 49 and Ex. 22 there are numerous cases of the usual form in V, 
in other ancient passages there are no occurrences of n- whatever ^ 

§ 3. The Chief Ancient Versions 0/ the Old Testament. 

It does not lie within the compass of the present work to give 

a complete account of the different Ancient Versions of the Old 

Testament : it will suffice if enough be said to illustrate their general 

character and relation to one another, so far as the Books of Samuel 

' H- occurs also in n[bK'] and n3 in the Nash Papynis, containing the Decalogue 
and Dt. 6, 4 f . (2 cent, a.d.) : see S. A. Cook, FSB A. 1903, 34 ff., or (briefly) my 
Exodus, p. 417. 

^ I do not stop to shew in detail that ancient Hebrew MSS. were unpointed. 
That they were unpointed is (i) probable, from the analogy of all ancient Semitic 
writing, which has come down to us in its original form (Moabitic, Aramaic, Phoe- 
nician, Hebrew Inscriptions); (2) certain, (a) from the very mimerous renderings 
of the Ancient Versions, presupposing a different vocalization from that of the 
Massoretic text, which it cannot reasonably be supposed that the translators would 
have adopted had they had pointed texts before them ; {U) from the silence of the 
Talmud and Jerome as regards any system of punctuation, which, when it is con- 
sidered that passages are frequently discussed, and alternative renderings and pro- 
nunciations compared, both by the Rabbis and by Jerome, is more than would be 
credible, had Hebrew MSS. in their day been provided with points. (On Jerome, 
particulars may be found in Nowack's monograph [p. liii n. 4], p. 43 ff.) The 
system of points must have been introduced during the sixth and seventh cent. A.D. 
— a period of which the literary history is unfortunately shrouded in obscurity, 
which even the pedigree of Aaron Ben-Asher, brought to light by the Crimean MSS. 
(Strack, in the art. cited p. xxxiv «. 4, pp. 610-613), does not enable us to pierce. 

1365 d 

xxxiv Introduction 

are concerned, and to establish the principles upon which they may 
be used for purposes of textual criticism ^ 

The special value of the Ancient Versions consists in the fact that 
they represent MSS. very much earlier than any Hebrew MSS. at 
present extant, and belonging in some cases to different recensions. 
The majority of Hebrew MSS. are of the twelfth to the sixteenth 
centuries '^. Very few are earlier : the earliest of which the date is 
known with certainty being the MS. of the Latter Prophets, now at 
St. Petersburg, which bears a date = A.D. 916'. This MS., though 
it differs from the great majority of Hebrew MSS. by exhibidng (like 
others acquired within the last half-century from the East *) the super- 
linear system of points and accents, does not contain a substantially 
different text. In fact, so soon as we pass beyond the recognized 
variants known as the Qrfs, the variations exhibited by extant Hebrew 
MSS. are slight; in other words, all MSS. belong io the same recension, 
and are descended from the same imperfect archetype ®. Existing MSS. 
all represent what is termed the Massoretic text®. That this text. 

^ For fuller information on the subject of the following pages, see generally 
(where special monographs are not referred to) Wellhausen's edition of Bleek's 
Einleitung, ed. 4, 1878, p. 571 ff., or ed. 5, 1886, p. 523 ff., with the references. 
Comp. Burkitt's art. Text and Versions (OT.) in EB. iv, col. 501 1 ff. 

2 Comp. Strack's art. Text of the OT. in DB. iv, p. 727 ff. 

3 Published in facsimile with Prolegomena by H. L. Strack, Codex Babylonicns 
Petropolitanus (St. Petersburg, 1876). Another relatively ancient MS. is the 
Reuchlin Codex of the Prophets at Carlsruhe (a. d. 1105), De Rossi's 154, 
the facsimile of a page of which may be seen in Stade's Gesch. Isr. i. p. 32, or in 
the Palaeogr. Society's Volume, PL LXXVII. Ginsburg {Introd. io the Heb. Bible, 
1 897, p. 475 ff.) describes a MS. (Brit. Mus. Or. 4445), which he assigns to c. a.d. 830. 

* On these MSS. see Strack in the Zeitschr. fur Luth. Theol. u. Kirche, 1875, 
p. 605 ff., and Wickes, Hebrew Prose Accents, App. ii. p. 142 ff., with the references. 

* Comp. Olshausen, Die Psalmen (1853), p. 17 ff. ; Lagarde, Proverbien, p. 2 ; 
and the note in Stade, ZA TIV. iv. 303. 

* The variations exhibited by existing MSS. have been most completely collated 
by Kennicott, V. T. c. Var. Lect. 1776, 1780; and De Rossi, Variae Lectiones V. T., 
1784-98. But for assistance in recovering the genuine text of the passages — which 
are not few — in the Hebrew Bible, which bear the marks of corruption upon their 
face, one consults these monumental works in vain. And how little is to be gained 
for the same end from the MSS. discovered since De Rossi's day, may be learnt 
from Cornill's collation of the MS. of A.D. 916, for Ezekiel, Das Buck des Pro- 
pheten Ezcchiel (1886), p. 8 f. Baer's editions of the text of different parts of the 
OT. (the whole, except Ex.-Dt.) are valuable as exhibiting the Massoretic text in 

§ 3- Character of the Massorettc Text xxxv 

however, does not reproduce the autographs of the OT. in their 
original integrity becomes manifest, as soon as it is examined with 
sufficient care and minuteness. It is true, since the rise of the school 
called the Massorites in the seventh and eighth centuries, and probably 
for parts of the Old Testament, especially the Law, from a considerably 
earlier date, the Jews displayed a scrupulous fidelity in the preservation 
and correct transmission of their sacred books : but nothing is more 
certain than that the period during which this care was exercised was 
preceded by one of no small laxity, in the course of which corruptions 
of different kinds found their way into the text of the Old Testament. 
The Jews, when it was too late to repair by this means the mischief 
that had been done, proceeded to guard their sacred books with 
extraordinary care, with the result that corrupt readings were simply 
perpetuated, being placed by them (of course, unconsciously) on pre- 
cisely the same footing as the genuine text, and invested with a fictitious 
semblance of originality. Opinions may differ, and, as our data for 
arriving at a decision are often imperfect, cannot but be expected 
to diflTer, as to the extent of corruption in the Massoretic text: but 
of the fact, there can be no question. The proof, as was shewn by 
Professor Kirkpatrick in a paper read at the Church Congress at 
Portsmouth, 1885 {Guardian, Oct, 7, p. 1478; comp. The Psalms, in 
the Cambridge Bible, p. Ixvi), is to be found, stated briefly, in the 
following facts : (i) There are passages in which the text, as it stands, 
cannot be translated without violence to the laws of grammar, or is 
irreconcileable with the context or with other passages; (2) parallel 
passages (especially parallel lists of names) found in more than one 

what is deemed by its editor to be its best attested form ; but they are naturally of 
DO service to those whose object it is to get behind the Massoretic tradition, for the 
purpose of obtaining a text that is purer and more original. The same may be said 
of Ginsburg's Hebrew Bible : this exhibits the Massoretic text in what its editor 
considers to be its best attested form : but though variants from the versions, and 
even conjectural readings, are occasionally mentioned, the great majority of variants 
collected, especially in the second edition, with indefatigable industry, from a large 
number of MSS. and early printed editions, relate only to differences of orthography 
and accentuation, not affecting the sense. The best collection both of variants 
from the versions and of conjectural emendations is that contained in Kittel's 
Biblia Hebraica. But in the acceptance of both variants and emendations, con- 
siderable discrimination must be exercised. 

d 2 

xxxvi Introduction 

book, differ in such a manner as to make it clear that the variations 
are due largely to textual corruption ; (3) the Ancient Versions contain 
various readings which often bear a strong stamp of probability upon 
them, and remove or lessen the difficulties of the Hebrew text. The 
present volume will supply illustrations. When the nature of the old 
character and orthography is considered, the wonder indeed is that the 
text of the Old Testament is as relatively free of corruption as appears 
to be the case. If, then, these corruptions are to be removed otherwise 
than by conjecture, we must discover, if possible, a text (or texts), 
which, unlike the text of all Hebrew MSS. which we possess, is 
relatively free from them. And such texts are afforded by the Ancient 
Versions. These versions were made from MSS. older by many 
centuries than those which formed the basis of the Massoretic text ; 
and when we consult them in crucial passages, where the Massoretic 
text has the appearance of being in error, we constantly find that the 
readings which they presuppose are intrinsically superior to those 
exhibited by the Massoretic text, and have evidently been made from 
a MS. (or MSS.) free from the corruption attaching to the latter. 

The work of the Massorites, it should be remembered, was essentially 
conservative : their aim was not to /orm a text, but by fixing the pro- 
nunciation and other means, to preserve a text which, in all essentials, 
they received, already formed, from others. The antecedents of the 
text which thus became the basis of the Massoretic text can only be 
determined approximately by conjecture. It was already substantially 
the same in ii.-v. cent. a. d. ; for quotations in the Mishnah and 
Gemara exhibit no material variants ^ The Targums also (see below) 

^ This seems to be true, notwithstanding the very large number of variants from 
the Talmud, Midrashim, and even later Rabbinical authorities, collected with great 
industry by V. Aptowitzer in Das Schrijtwort in der Rabbinischen Literatur (see 
p. XV), from 1-2 Samuel, and (III, 95 fT.) Joshua (cf. Strack,/V^/«^. Vet. 
Test., 1873, p. 94 ff.). These variants, viz., relate mostly to jwa// differences, such as 
the presence or absence of "1, the article, JlX, or other unimportant word ; ?y or P for 
7N, or vice versa ; the sing, for the plural, or vice versa, in such a case as I 15, 6 ; 
3 for 3 with the inf., or vice versa: the variants practically never affect the sense 
materially, or correct a certainly corrupt passage. In many cases also the variant 
seems to be due to the citation being made from memory, the substance being 
recollected correctly, but not the exact wording. There are, however, cases in 
which the number of seemingly independent authorities agreeing in a variant is 

§ 3- Character of the Massoretic Text xxxvii 

presuppose a text which deviates from it but slightly, though the 
deviations are sufficient to shew that, even in official Jewish circles, 
absolute uniformity did not exist. All that can be said is that the text 
which was adopted by the Jews as a standard, and which, as such, 
was made by the Massorites the basis of their labours, had in previous 
stages of its history been exposed to influences, which resulted in the 
introduction into it of error and corruption. The MSS. on which the 
Septuagint is based, and those from which the Massoretic text is 
descended, must, of course, have had some common meeting-point 
(prior to the second or third century b.c.) ; and whilst on the whole the 
purer text was undoubtedly preserved by the Jews, in many individual 
cases the text in their hands underwent corruption, and the purer 
readings are preserved to us by the Septuagint. The texts on which 
the other Ancient Versions are based (which usually deviate less from 
the Massoretic text, and often accordingly [e.g. Ez. 40 ff.] reproduce 
corruptions from which the Septuagint is free) will have been derived 
from the current Jewish text at a later period than the LXX, when the 
corrupting influences had been longer operative upon it. Still, these 
versions also sometimes agree with LXX against MT. in preserving 
the purer text \ 

larger than can be reasonably accounted for by the supposition that the memory 
was always at fault, and in these cases the variant depends no doubt upon actual 
MSS. In some instances this is known to be the case from the MSS. collated by 
Kennicott and others (e. g. ^33 for ^3^ in I 18, 14 ; Fimxn for ^imx in I 30, 8) ; 
in others, though no MSS. at present known exhibit the variants, there may well 
have been such, — especially where the variant is supported by the LXX or other 
ancient version, — extant in Talmudic times, and even later (cf. Aptow. I, p. 3; and, 
for the distinction of certain, probable, and possible, MS. variants, p. 28, III, p. vi). 
But even these variants can hardly be called material or important. The most 
noticeable is perhaps TlDXH (as LXX) for QmSkH JIIN in I 14, 18, which 
seems (Aptow. I, p. 48 ff.) to have been read in MSS. as late as Ibn Ezra's time 
(a. D. 1104-1165). On the other hand, there are numerous cases in which the 
readings of the Talmud agree minutely (e. g. in ihe plena or defectiva scriptio) with 
the Massoretic text (Strack, op. cit., pp. 70-72, 80-94). 

^ No doubt there are passages in the MT., the character of which makes it prac- 
tically certain that, thoagh neither the LXX nor any other version exhibits any 
variant, the text is nevertheless corrupt, i. e. the corruption was already present in 
the MSS. which were the common source both of the LXX and other versions, and 
of the MT. Here, it is evident, the only remedy is critical conjecture (a brilliant 

xxxviii Introduction 

The use of the Ancient Versions is not, however, always such a 
simple matter as might be inferred from the last paragraph but one. 
The Ancient Versions are not uniformly word-for-word translations, 
from which the Hebrew text followed by the translators might be 
recovered at a glance : sometimes their text, especially that of the 
LXX, has not been transmitted to us in its primitive integrity; and 
even where it has been so transmitted, they contain, or are liable 
to contain, an element of paraphrase, the nature and extent of which 
must be determined as accurately as possible before they are available 
as safe guides for the correction of the Massoretic text. In deter- 
mining the character of this element, each Version, and often each 
book, or group of books, contained in a Version — for the different 
parts of an Ancient Version were not always the work of one and the 
same hand, and the different translators were liable to follow different 
methods in translating — must be examined separately : our standards 
of comparison must be those parts of the Massoretic text which afford 
presumptive evidence of being free from corruption ; and, in cases where 
this is matter of doubt, the intrinsic superiority of one text above the 
other, as estimated by its conformity with the context, its grammatical 
correctness, its agreement with the general style and manner of the 
writers of the Old Testament, and similar considerations. In the use 
of an Ancient Version for the purposes of textual criticism, there are 
three precautions which must always be observed : (i) we must reason- 
ably assure ourselves that we possess the Version itself in its original 
integrity; (2) we must eliminate such variants as have the appearance 
of originating merely with the translator ; (3) the text represented by 
the remainder, when we are able to recover it, which will be that of the 
MS. (or MSS.) used by the translator, we must then compare carefully, 
in the light of the considerations just stated, with the existing Hebrew 
text, in order to determine on which side the superiority lies. The 
second and third of these precautions are not less important than 

one in Comill on Ez. 13, 20 : D'B'sn jriN for CK'QJTlX;). The dangers of con- 
jectural emendation are obvious ; and many such emendations rest upon doubtful 
theories, or are for other reasons unconvincing : but some, especially such as involve 
only a slight change in the ductus litterarum, are well deserving of acceptance. Cf. 
G. B. Gray, Encycl. Brit>^ iii. 860 ; F. C. Burkitt, EB. iv. 5029-31. 

§ 3- 1^^^^ Ancient Versions and Textual Criticism xxxix 

the first : it is necessary to insist upon them, as cases are on record in 
which they have been unduly neglected '. 

I. The Septuagini. The Version that is of greatest importance for 
purposes of textual criticism is that known as the Septuagint"^ . In 
the case of the Pentateuch, this Version dates, no doubt, from the 
third century B.C. — according to tradition from the reign of Ptolemy 
Philadelphus, b.c. 285-247: the subsequent parts of the OT. were 
probably completed gradually in the course of the two following 
centuries, for the differences of style and method exhibited by the 
different books shew that the whole cannot be the work of a single 
hand. The characteristics of the LXX are best learnt from actual 
study of it, though illustrations, so far as the Books of Samuel are 
concerned, are given below. In some books, the translation is much 
more literal than in others ; in difficult passages, especially such as 
are poetical, the translators have evidently been often unable to seize 
the sense of the original. Except in such passages as Gen. 49. 
Dt. 32. 33, the Pentateuch is the best translated part of the historical 
books : the Psalter is tolerably well done, and though few Psalms are 
wholly free from error, the general sense is fairly well expressed : 
the translation of Isaiah is poor and paraphrastic ; those of Job and the 
Minor Prophets are often unintelligible. In the case of Jeremiah the 
text represented by LXX deviates so considerably from the Massoretic 
text as to assume the character of a separate recension '. There are 
few books of the OT. in which the Massoretic text may not, more or 
less frequently, be emended with help of the LXX * ; but the LXX 

1 In Prof. Workman's Text of Jeremiah (1889), the neglect to observe the second 
precaution has led to disastrous consequences : a very large proportion of the exam- 
ples cited, p. 283 ff., in the * Conspectus of the Variations ' presuppose no difference 
in the Hebrew text read by the translator, but are due simply to the fact that the 
translator did not make it his aim to produce a v?ord-for-word version. See a 
criticism by the present writer in the Expositor, May, 1889, pp. 321-337. 

* See, very fully, on this Dr. Swete's excellent Introduction to the OT. in Greek 
(1900) ; and St. John Thackeray's Grammar of the OT. in Greek, ace. to the Sept., 
vol. i (Introduction, Orthography, and Accidence), 1909 ; also Nestle, DB. iv.437ff. 

* See LOT^ 269 f., with the references; and add L. Kohler, ZAW. 1909, 1-39 
(on Jer. 1-9). 

* And naturally, sometimes, of other Ancient Versions as well. A minimum of 
such necessary emendations may be found in the margin of the Revised Version : 

xl Introduction 

Version of Samuel, parts of Kings, and Ezekiel, is of special value, as 
the MS. (or MSS.) on which the Massoretic text of these books is based, 
must have suffered more than usually from corrupting influences. 

The Versmis of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. After the 
destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, a reaction began in Jewish circles 
against the use of the LXX, partly, as seems probable, originating in 
opposition to the Christians (who from the times in which the NT. 
was written had been accustomed to quote the LXX as an authoritative 
Version of the OT.), partly in a growing sense of the imperfections of 
the Septuagint translation, and of its inadequacy as a correct repre- 
sentation of the Hebrew original. Hence arose in the second cent. 
A.D. the three improved Greek Versions of the OT., those oi Aquila, 
Theodotion, and Symmachus. Aquila and Theodotion are both men- 
tioned by Irenaeus (iii. 21) writing c. a.d. 180: Symmachus lived 
probably somewhat later. Of these translators, Aquila was a Jewish 
proselyte of Pontus. His method was that of extreme literalness ', 
which he carried to such an extent, that he sought to represent 
words which had acquired derived meanings in accordance with their 
etymology, and even to reproduce particles for which Greek possessed 
no proper equivalent ^ Jerome on Is. 8, 14 mentions a tradition that 

a larger selection — the majority, at least as it appears to the present writer, not less 
necessary — is afforded by the notes in the ' Variorum Bible,' published by Eyre 
and Spottiswoode. But many more are in fact necessary : see examples in the 
writer's Book ofjeretjiiah ^ (1906), and Nah.-Mal. in the Century Bible (1906) ; and 
compare (with discrimination) any recent critical commentary. A good collection 
of emendations from the LXX and other Versions, with explanations, will be found 
in T. K. Abbott, Essays chiefly on the Original Texts of OT. and AIT. {iSgi), p. 1 ff. 

1 AovXevcuv tt) 'E^paiKfi \(^(i, Origen, Ep. ad Africannm, § 2. 

2 Jerome, Ep. 57 ad Pammachium : quia Hebraei non solum habent dp0pa sed et 
irpdapOpa, ille KaKo(r]kojs et syllabas interpretatur et literas, dicitque iv KfcpaXaicf 
tKTiafv 6 Oeos crvv [HN] rov oiipavbv koI crvv ttjv yrji'. H locale he represented by 
-Se, as ^ncpeipde I Ki. 22, 49; Kvprjvrji'Se 2 Ki. 16, 9. As examples of etymolo- 
gizing renderings may be quoted ariK-nvoT-qs for "iriif, SKSrjfiaTiaavTo fie for '•JlinJD 
^. 22, 13, (k\(ktw6tit( for V1I2T) Is. 52, 11, TtvoPTovv for fjiy, etc. Sometimes, in 
genuine Rabbinic fashion (e. g. Gen. 41, 43 Targ.), he treated a word as a com- 
pound : thus I Sam. 6, 8 IJINH is rendered by him tv vcpfi icovpas as though = 
73 S'lXa ; if. 16, I Dn^fO ran(iv6<ppajv Kal an\ovs (00 ']'0); 73, 21 pin^K Trvp Kairvi- 
^ofievov (pin t^'K) : cf. p. Ixxxiii. See more in the Prolegomena to Dr. Field's 
Hexapla, p. xxi ff., or in the art. Hexapla (by Dr. C. Taylor) in the Dictionary of 
Christian Biography. 

§ 3- 1- The Greek Versions of the Old Testament xli 

Aquila was a pupil of R. Aqiba ; and the statement is confirmed by 
the character of his translation. For R. Aqiba, at the beginning of the 
second cent, a.d., introduced a new system of interpretation, laying 
exaggerated stress upon even syllables and letters, quite in the manner 
followed by Aquila ^. 

The Version of Theodotion was rather a revision of the LXX than 
a new translation, and hence frequently agrees with it. Renderings 
of Theodotion have often found their way into MSS. of the LXX, 
sometimes as doublets, sometimes as insertions made with the view of 
supplying apparent omissions (i Sam. 17, 12-31 in Cod. A). In the 
case of Daniel, Theodotion's Version superseded that of the LXX, and 
occupies its place in ordinary MSS. and editions^. 

Symmachus was an Ebionite (Eus. Hist. Eccl. vi. 17). He is 
praised by Jerome as frequently clever and successful in his renderings : 
not slavish like Aquila, and yet reproducing, often with happy accom- 
modations to Greek idiom, the sense of tlje^original '. 

Origens Hexapla. These three translations are not preserved in 
their entirety : they have been transmitted only in fragments, chiefly 
through the work of Origen, which is now to be described. 

Origen (a.d. 185-254), observing not only the variations between 
the Septuagint and the Hebrew text current in his day, but also the 
variations between different MSS. of the Septuagint itself, undertook 

^ Illustrations may be found in Dr. Pusey's What is of Faith as to Everlasting 
Punishment ? p. 80 ff. ; Gratz, Gesch. der Jrnlen, iv. 53 ff. 

^ The LXX Version of Daniel was first published from a unique MS. in 1772. 
In Tisch.'s edition it stands at the end of the second volume ; in Swete's it is printed 
in parallel pages with Theodotion. Renderings agreeing remarkably with Theodo- 
tion's Version occur in the NT. (cf. p. 129 «.) and writers of the early part of the 
second century : it has hence been conjectured that his version of this book is based 
upon an earlier Greek translation independent of the LXX (Salmon, Introd. to the 
iVr., ed. 3,p. 586ff.). 

' Illustrations are given in abundance by Dr. Field, Hexapla, p. xxxi f. : for 
instance, in his use of the ptcp., of adverbs, of compounds, i Sam. 22, 8 LXX 
(literally) kv tZ SiaOtaOai tov vlov /xov SiaOrjKrjv, Symm. awTiOeftevov tov vtov ftov ; 
Gen. 4, 2 LXX Kal irpoatOrjKe riKTeiv, Symm. Kal TrdXtv trtKiv; Pr. 15, 15 3^5 31t3 
Symm. 6 euOujuwc; Is. 9, 15 D''JQ NIC'J aiUaifios; i Sam. 25, 3 73^ DSIO LXX 
ayaBi] avviati, 2. tvbiavorjTos ; ib. trj7V^~^'\ LXX vovrfpbs iv eirirrjSevfjLaai, 2. kuko- 
■yvwijuuv; 2 Sam. 12, 8 HJilDI nM3 LXX KaTci ravra, 2. iroWavkajiova. 

xlii Introduction 

the task of recovering, if possible, the true text of the Septuagint, 
partly by aid of the Hebrew, partly by aid of the other Greek Versions. 
For this purpose, he arranged the different texts which he wished to 
compare in six parallel columns ; the work thus formed being known 
in consequence as the Hexapla. In the first column, he placed the 
Hebrew text; in the second, the Hebrew transcribed in Greek 
characters ; in the third and fourth, Aquila and Symmachus respec- 
tively ; in the fifth, the Septuagint; in the sixth, Theodotion. In the 
Septuagint column, additions, to which nothing corresponded in 

the Hebrew, were marked by an obelus prefixed (-f- 4) ^ ; 

omissions, where words standing in the Hebrew were not represented 
in the Greek, were filled in by him, usually from Theodotion, and 

noted similarly by an asterisk (-X- ^)^ In cases where copies 

of the LXX differed between themselves, it is probable that Origen 
adopted silently the reading that agreed most closely with the Hebrew. 
Proper names, also, which the original translators had sometimes 
transliterated with some freedom, sometimes expressed in accordance 
with the older pronunciation, or which in other cases had become 
corrupted by transcription, Origen assimilated to the current Hebrew 
text. The manuscript of this great work was preserved for long in 
the Library of Pamphilus in Caesarea ; Jerome collated it specially for 
his own use ; but in 638 Caesarea fell into the hands of the Saracens, 
and from that time the Library and its contents are heard of no more. 
Copies of the whole work were probably never made ; but the Septua- 
gint column was edited separately by Eusebius and Pamphilus, and 

* The sign << indicates the close of the words to which the obelus or asterisk 

^ The following is the important passage in which Origen himself describes both 
the motive and the plan of his work : Nvrt Se Zrikovon iroXA^ fiyovev 17 rwv avri- 
ypa<pwv ^ta(popa, fire diro paOvjxias rivwv "^pcKpiuiv fXn aith ToXptrjs tlvu/v fxoxOTjpai riji 
Stopdu/atoJs TcDv ypa(pofxivujv, ('ire duo tSjv tSl kavTois SoKovvra If 777 SiopOojati irpoari- 
BevTwv fj dcpaipovvTwv. T^v fiiv ovv kv rfj Siop9ajcT(t rfjs naKaids SiaOrfKtjs 5ia(pwviai', 
6tov SiSovTos, evpofitv l&aaaOai KpiTT]pi(>> \pr)(T6L^evo\. rais Xot-irais tKSocreaiv . . . /cat 
TivcL ixtv w^iKiaapLiv Iv T<£ 'E0pcuKa> firj Kfifieva ov ToX/xrjaavTfS avrd rrdvTJ) TrepitKeiv, 
Tivd Si jxiT darfpiaicwv irpoffeOrjKaf^tv, 'iva SfjKov 17 on fifj Keifitva wapd rois O' (k tuiv 
XomSiv fK56atuv avix<puvws tw 'E0patK^ wpoaiOrjKdnfv, Kal o ^ovKopavos irpoarjTai 
avrd, w 5J irpoaKoiTTei to toiovtov t PovKtrai irtpl rrjs TrapaSox^s avruiv, ■q pcq, woiTjff'g 
{Comm. in Matth. xv. § 14). 

§ 3- 1- Origen's Hexapla xliii 

was widely used. At the same time, the more important variants 
from the Versions of Aq. Theod. and Symm., contained in the other 
columns, were often excerpted ; and many of these have thus been 
preserved to us, partly through citations made by the Fathers, partly 
Irom the margins of other MSS. In particular, Origen's text of the 
LXX (called the Hexaplar text), with many such marginal variants, 
was translated into Syriac by Paul, Bishop of Telia, in a.d. 617-18; 
and a peculiarly fine MS. of this translation (containing the pro- 
phetical and poetical books), preserved in the Ambrosian Library at 
Milan, has been published in facsimile by Ceriani. The most com- 
plete edition of the remains of the Hexapla is that of the late Dr. Field 
(Oxford, 1875), who has shewn remarkable skill in recovering from the 
renderings of the Syriac translation the original Greek \ 

Origen's work was projected with the best intentions : and it has 
been the means of preserving to us much, of priceless value, that 
would otherwise have perished. But it did not secure the end which 
he had in view. Origen did not succeed in restoring the genuine 
translation of the LXX. He asstmed that the original Septuagint 
was that which agreed most closely with the Hebreiv text as he knew it : 
he was guided partly by this, partly by the other Versions (Aq. Theod. 
Symm.), which were based substantially upon it : and where the 
Septuagint text differed from the current Hebrew text, he systematically 
altered it to bring it into conformity with it. This was a step in the 
wrong direction. Where a passage appears in two renderings, the one 
free, the other agreeing with the existent Hebrew text, it is \ht former 
which has the presumption of being the more original : the latter has 
the presumption of having been altered subsequently, in order that it 
might express the Hebrew more closely. Origen, no doubt, freed the 
text of the LXX from many vmior faults ; but in the main his work 
tended to obliterate the most original and distinctive features of the 
Version. To discover the Hebrew text used by the translators we 
must recover, as far as possible, the text of the Version as it left the 
translators' hands ; and Origen's labours, instead of facilitating, rather 
impeded this process. In addition to this, the practical effect of the 

1 See farther Swete, Introd. to the OT. in Greek, pp. 59-76 ; DB. iv. 442 ff. 

xliv Introduction 

method adopted by Origen was not to improve the purity of the LXX 
MSS. themselves ; for not only were the signs which he himself used 
to indicate additions and omissions often neglected, as the Hexaplar 
text of the LXX was transcribed, but the Hexapla, from its very 
nature, encouraged the formation of mixed texts or recensions, so that, 
for instance, MSS. arose exhibiting side by side the genuine LXX and 
corrections introduced from Theodotion \ 

The origmal text of the LXX. For the recovery of this, the follow- 
ing canons have been laid down by Lagarde "^ : 

1. The MSS. of the Greek translation of the OT. are all either 
immediately or mediately the result of an eclectic process: it follows 
that he who aims at recovering the original text must follow an eclectic 
method likewise. His only standard will be his knowledge of the 
style of the individual translators : his chief aid will be the faculty 
possessed by him of referring the readings which come before him to 
their Semitic original, or else of recognizing them as corruptions 
originating in the Greek. 

2. If a verse or part of a verse appears in both a free and a slavishly 
literal translation, the former is to be counted the genuine rendering. 

3. If two readings co-exist, of which one expresses the Massoretic 
text, while the other can only be explained from a text deviating from 
it, the latter is to be regarded as the original. 

The first of these canons takes account of the fact that existing 
Greek MSS. exhibit a more or less mixed text, and justifies us in not 
adhering exclusively to a single MS. : a given MS. may contain on the 
whole the relatively truest text of the LXX ; but other MSS. may also 
in particular instances, in virtue of the mixed origin of the text which 
they exhibit, preserve genuine Septuagintal renderings. The second 
and third canons formulate the principle for estimating double render- 
ings in the same MS., or alternative renderings in different MSS., and 
derive their justification from the fact that the general method followed 
by later revisers and correctors was that of assimilating the renderings 
of the LXX to the Hebrew text (the ' Hebraica Veritas ') current in 

* On such ' Hexaplaric' texts, see Swete, Introd., pp. 76-78, 482. 
^ Anmerkungen zur griech. Obersetzung dcj- Froverbien, p. 3. 

§ 3- !• The Origmal Text of the Septuagint xlv 

their day. The process, however, of recovering the genuine Septua- 
gintal rendering, from two or more variants, can be successfully 
carried on only by the continuous comparison of the existing Hebrew 
text : it is this which affords us a general idea of what, in a given 
passage, is to be expected, and supplies us with a criterion for 
estimating the relative originality of the variants that may come before 
us. An illustration may be taken from Jud. 5, 8, cited by We. from 
Ewald. Cod. A there reads a-KeTrrj veaviScov crtpofiao-Toyv av7](f>0r] Kai 
o-ipo/i,ao-T7/9. These words are evidently corrupt ; how are they to be 
restored ? The Massoretic text is nOTl nxn"; DX p?D. This gave the 
clue, which enabled Ewald to explain and restore the words quoted. 
The Hebrew shews that they contain a double rendering, which must 
be read a-Kiirrjv iav 180) Kol (Tipofxd(TTr]v and (TKeTrr] iav 6<f)0y kol cnpo- 
fida-Trj's, and that the first — either a /reer rendering of nNT" DN, or 
presupposing the variant HNIX DX — is the true reading of the LXX. 
But this could hardly have been determined, or at least could not 
have been determined with the same assurance, without the guidance 
afforded by the Hebrew text itself ^ 

Of course, after the application of Lagarde's canons, the two all- 
important questions still await the textual critic : whether, viz., 
(i) the reading which deviates from the Massoretic text is actually 
based upon a divergent text, or is simply a freer rendering of the same 
text; and whether, further, (2) supposing the former alternative to be 
the more probable, the divergent text is superior or not to the 
Massoretic text. And these two questions can only be determined 
by help of the general considerations alluded to above (p. xxxviii). 
Illustrations will be afforded by the notes in the present volume. In 
very many cases the answer is apparent at once ; but not unfrequently 
more difficult cases arise, in which the answer is by no means 

* Various readings wiiich exist only in the Greek, and disappear when the Greek 
is translated back into Hebrew, are, of course, only indirectly, and in particular 
cases, of importance for the textual critic, who is interested primarily in such 
variants alone as presuppose a different Hebrew original : thus in Jud. i, 4. 5. 17 
(Koipav (B) and (Trara^av (A) equally express the Hebrew 13''1 ; in i Sam. 5, 4 ra 
(UTTpoaOia and to trpoOvpov and ana<pf9 all equallj' represent the same Hebrew term 
jnaon. variants of this kind are frequent in MSS. of the LXX. 

xlvi Introduction 

immediately evident, or in which the arguments on both sides may be 
nearly equally balanced. It is the judgement and acumen displayed in 
handling the more difficult cases which arise under these two heads, 
that mark a textual critic of the first order, and distinguish, for 
example, Wellhausen, in a conspicuous degree, both from Thenius 
on the one side, and from Keil on the other. 

MSS. of the LXX. According to a well-known passage of Jerome, 
three main recensions of the Septuagint prevailed in antiquity, that 
of Hesychius in Egypt, that of Lucian in Asia Minor and Constanti- 
nople, that of Origen in Palestine '. The Manuscripts containing the 
recensions of Hesychius and Origen are not certainly known ^ ; though 
Ceriani with some reason supposes Origen's to be contained in the 
Syriac version of the Hexaplar text, mentioned above, and in the allied 
Cod. 88 of Holmes and Parsons, and the Cod, Sarravianus ^ ; that 
of Lucian has been edited (as far as Esther) by Lagarde, and will be 
spoken of below. 

The three principal MSS. of the LXX are the Vatican (B), the 
Sinaitic (n or S), and the Alexandrian (A). The Vatican MS. is 
complete with the exception of Gen. i, i — 46, 28. 2 Sam. 2, 5-7. 
10-13. "A- ^^5' 27 — 137, 6; the Sinaitic MS. is defective for nearly 
the whole of Gen. — 2 Esdras, in the rest of the OT. the only serious 
lacuna is Ezekiel ; the Alexandrian MS. is complete except for Gen. 14, 
14-17. 15, 1-5. 16-19. ^6' 6~9- ^ Sam. 12, 18 — 14, 9. i/'. 49, 
20—79, II- That of all MSS. of LXX, B (with which N frequently 
agrees), as a rule, exhibits relatively the purest and most original 

• Preface to Chronicles (printed at the beginning of the Vulgate) : Alexandria et 
Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat anctorem ; Constantinopolis usque 
Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat ; mediae inter has provinciae 
Palestinos codices legunt quos ab Origene elaborates Eusebius et Pamphilus vul- 
gaverunt : totusque orbis hac inter se trifaria varietate compugnat. The last of 
these recensions is naturally the source of the Hexaplar text spoken of above ; and 
Jerome states elsewhere (I 635 Vallarsi) that it was read (' decantatur ') at Jerusa- 
lem and in the churches of the East. 

* Lagarde, Mittheilungen, ii. 52 ; comp. G. F. Moore, AJSL. xxix. 47-50. 

' Le recensioni dei LXX e la versione latina delta Ilala, Estratto dai Kendiconti 
del R. istituto Lombardo, Serie II, vol. xix, fasc. IV (Milan, 1886), p. 2. Lagarde, 
/. c. p. 56, says that he knows of one MS. of the Octateuch (in private hands), not 
yet collated, which ' almost certainly ' contains it. 

§ 3- 1. Manuscripts and Editions of the Septuagint xlvii 

Septuagintal text, is generally allowed ^ : that it contains double ren- 
derings, and has otherwise not escaped corruption, will appear presently 
(p. Iv ff.) '^. The Alexandrian MS. exhibits a text which has been 
systematically corrected so as to agree more closely with the Hebrew : 
proof of this is afforded by almost any page: thus i Sam. i, i where 
Cod. B has "AvOpwrro's rjv ii ApfiaOaLjx ^etcfia, Cod. A has Kat iyevcTO 
av^pwTTOS €19 ii ApfjiaOai/JL 2a)<^t/x=D''S1V D'»nD"in p inH tr''X NHM ^ 
The best edition of the LXX for ordinary use is that of Dr. Swete *, 
which contains (so far as they are extant) the text of B with the 
variants of X and other selected uncials on the margin : Lucian 
must be read in Lagarde's edition ^. The readings of other MSS. 
must, however, sometimes be consulted (for they may preserve read- 
ings of importance) ; these, so far as they have been collated, are 
chiefly to be found in the great work of Holmes and Parsons ^ 

* Its value, however, varies in different books : in some it exhibits more 
Hexaplaric elements than A. See Procksch, Studien zur Gesch. der Sept. (1910), 
pp. 44-9 ; Swete, p. 487 f. ; and comp. Torrey, Ezra Studies (1910), p. 92 ff. 

* Respecting the recension to which B presumably belongs, its text is of a 
character which led Dr. Hort to infer {Academy, Dec. 24, 1887) that it was copied 
from a MS. (or MSS.) partially akin to the MS. (or MSS.) which Origen,with the 
adaptations fitting it to his purpose, made the basis of the LXX text in his Hexapla : 
comp. Ceriani, /. c. p. 7, ' B exhibits the unrevised text of LXX as it was before 
Origen.' This view was accepted by Comill {G'dtt. gelehrte Nachrichten, 1888, 
pp. 194-6, where the view propounded by him in Ezechiel, pp. 81, 84, 95, is aban- 
doned) ; and it has been further confirmed by recent research : see Silberstein, who, 
in a study on the LXX of i Ki. {ZAW. 1893, p. i ff., 1894, p. i ff.), agrees (1894, 
p. 26) with Comill (p. 196) that 'B cum grano salis is the Vorlage of Origen's 
LXX column in the Hexapla ; and Rahlfs, Studien, i. 85. Rahlfs argues further 
{Gott. gel. Nachrichten, 1899, p. 72 ff.; cf. Studien, i. 87), from the order of the 
books in B agreeing with that given by Athanasius in his 39th Festal Epistle 
(a. D. 367), that B was written in Egypt, shortly after this date. 

^ See further Swete, Introd. p. 125 ff. 

* The OT. in Greek according to the Septuagint, vol. i, 1887 Q 1901), vol. ii, 
1891 (3 1907), vol. iii (2 1899). This edition supersedes that of Tischendorf. A 
larger edition {The OT. in Greek, edited by A. E. Brooke and N. McLean), con- 
taining an extensive apparatus criticus, is in course of publication by the Cambridge 
Press: at present (July, 191 2), three Parts (Gen.-Dt.) have appeared. 

' Librorum Vet. Test. Canonicorum Pars Prior Graece Pauli de Lagarde studio 
(i sumptibus edita (1883). This edition is very convenient; but it has no critical 
apparatus, and the text is not entirely satisfactory (see Moore, AJSL. xxix. 56). 

* Vetus Testamentum Graecum cum variis lectionibus, Oxonii, 1 798-1827. 
See Swete, The OT. in Greek, i. p. ix ; Introd. pp. 185-7. B"*^ ^f. n. 3, above. 

xlviii Introduction 

Ludan's recension of the Septuagint. In the apparatus criticus of 
Holmes and Parsons four MSS., 19, 82, 93 \ 108, are cited frequently 
as agreeing together in exhibiting a text considerably different from 
that of either B or A. That these MSS. preserved in some cases 
important readings of superior originality even to those of B was 
noticed by Wellhausen in 187 1 2, though he did not perceive the full 
bearing of the fact, or pursue the subject further beyond observing 
that Vercellone had remarked that the readings of these MSS. often 
coincided with those of the Itala, or pre-Hieronymian Latin Version 
of the OT. That these MSS. exhibit in fact the recension of Lucian 
appears to have been first recognized by Ceriani in 1863 I The 
same conclusion was arrived at also by Lagarde ^ who pointed to the 
numerous agreements between the text of these MSS. (to which he 
adds 118) and the citations of Chrysostom, who, as a priest of Antioch, 
and Bishop of Constantinople, would presumably, in accordance with 
Jerome's statement, make use of this recension; and its correctness 
was further established by Dr. Field '", who shewed that the text of the 
same four MSS. corresponded with readings cited in the Syriac 
Hexaplar text with the letter L. Lucian was a priest of the Church 
of Antioch, who suffered martyrdom at Nicomedia, a.d. 312 : accord- 
ing to the passage of Suidas cited below", he prepared with great 
pains a revised edition of the Septuagint, which he sought by com- 
parison with the Hebrew to free from the corruptions which by accident 

^ MS. 93 is in the main the basis of Lagarde's text (Rahlfs, iii. 79 f. ; Moore, 57). 

* Der Text der Bilcher Samuelis, pp. 22T-4. 

* Monumenta Sacra et Profana, ii. 2 (1864), pp. 76, 98, 102 (specially Codd. 19, 
108, 118, and the Complut. text); also (for the Lamentations) ib.'x. (1861), on 
Lam. 2, 22 end. 3, 7. 22. 29. 30. 33. 63. 4, 7 etc., where the agreement of Theo- 
doret is also noted. See also Ceriani's opinion as cited in Dr. Field's Hexapla, ii. 
429 (published originally in 1869). 

* Pars Prior etc. Preface, pp. vii-xiv. 

* Hexapla, p. Ixxxvii. 

' S. V. AovKtavos 6 fiaprvr ovtos tcLs iepas jSi^Aovj Otaaa/xevos ttoAv to vo66v 
flffSe^antvas, rod ye xpovov Xvfijjvafiivov iroWd twv iv avrais, Kal rrjs avvixov'5 d.<p' 
fTfpwv th tnpa neraOeafais, ical fXivroi Kai rivcav avOpwirojv irovrjpoTCLTwv, ot tov 
"EWrjvia fiov TrpofiarriKHaav, rrapaTpfipai tov tv aiirais BeXrjaavTcuv vovu, Kal iroAv to 
ki^StjXov ivaKivaaafxivwy, ai/Tos anacras dvaXajiwv ck ttjs 'EPpaiSos iiravtviuaaTo 
yXwTT-rj^, 7]v Kal avTfjv ts Ta /xaKitTTa ^v i]KpiPwKujs ttovov tt) iiravopOwan TrXilaTov 

§ 3- I- Lucians Recension of the Sephiagint xlix 

or design had in process of time been introduced into it. One large 
class of alterations made by Lucian affect, however, only the literary 
form of the Septuagint : they consist namely in the substitution of 
synonyms (as irapeyevero for rjX.6€v, €7roA.e/xrjcr€ for Trapera^aTO, to 
apea-Tov for to dyaOov) for the words originally used by the translators. 
Obviously variants such as these do not point to a different reading 
of the Hebrew. Double renderings also occur frequently in Lucian's 
recension, i.e. retaining the normal Septuagintal version of a passage, 
he placed beside it a rendering expressing more closely the current 
Hebrew text, either framed by himself, or (more probably) adopted 
from particular MSS., or other translators. But what imparts to 
Lucian's work its great importance in the criticism of the OT., is the 
fact that it embodies renderings, not found in other MSS. of the 
LXX, which presuppose a Hebrew original self-evidently superior, in 
the passages concerned, to the existing Massoretic text. Whether 
these renderings were derived by him from MSS. of the LXX of 
which all other traces have disappeared, or whether they were based 
directly upon Hebrew MSS. which had preserved the genuine reading 
intact, whether in other words they were derived mediately or im- 
mediately from the Hebrew, is a matter of subordinate moment : 
the fact remains that Lucian's recension contains elements resting 
ultimately upon Hebrew sources, which enable us to correct, with 
absolute certainty, corrupt passages of the Massoretic text. Several 
instances will be found in the notes in the present volume. In some 
of these, it is instructive to notice, a conjectural emendation made 
by a modem scholar has proved to be afterwards confirmed by the 
testimony of Lucian ^ The full gain from this quarter is in all 
probability not yet exhausted : a number of passages, selected from 
the Books of Kings, in which the Massoretic text may be emended 
by the help of Lucian's recension, are noticed by I. Hooykaas '^. * Let 
him who would himself investigate and advance learning, by the side 
of the other Ancient Versions, accustom himself above all things to 

' So in 2 Ki. 15, 10 Gr'atz's clever conjecture {Gesch. der Juden, ii, i, p. 99) 
Dy?3^3 for the un-Hebraic Oyplp is confirmed by Lucian. Cf. on II 24, 5. 

* lets over de Grieksche vertaling van het oude Testament (Rotterdam, 1888), 
p. 12 fF. Cf. Burney, Notes on the Hebrew Text of Kings (1903), p. xxxi. 

1 Introduction 

the use of Field's Hexapla, and Lagarde's edition of the Recension of 
Lucian '.' 

On Lucian, see now the very thorough discussion of his recension of 1-2 Ki. in 
Rahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien, iii. (191 1), with synopses of the various readings (for 
these booiis) found in the MSS. (19, 82, 83, 108, 127) of Lucian's recension itself 
(§§ 9*13)1 ^^^ ^^s*^ °f Lucian's readings found in other MSS. of LXX (§§ 4-7)1 ''^ 
Josephus (§§ 15-21), or quoted by the Fathers (§§ 25-38). A minute study of 
Lucian's text of i Ki. i (pp. 163-191), and a study of all its principal variants in 
1-2 Ki. generally (pp. 191-290), lead Rahlfs to the conclusion (pp. 190 f., 192) that 
while so?ne of the variants are corrections introduced by Lucian himself from the 
Hebrew into the LXX text current at the time, others cannot be so explained, but 
point to older sources; and (pp. 235, 290 f.) that the foundation of Lucian's text is 
an old, /?r-Hexaplaric text, closely allied to (though not identical with) Cod. B, 
and to the Greek text which formed the basis of the older^ Ethiopic version'. 

Josephus, though he by no means agrees always with Lucian's readings, affords 
evidence that readings of Luc. were current in the ist cent. A. D. Rahlfs (§ 16) cites 
after Mez, Die Bibel von Josephus (1895) — who, however, quotes also many read- 
ings not specifically Luciauic — from 1-2 Sam. nine cases of Jos. agreeing with 
Luc. against Codd. A, B, viz. : — 
II 3) 7 n*N, @ loX: Luc. 2(6)t)3a ; Jos. vii. 23 ^i^arov. 

15, 12 "'3V3, ® Vulg. rtuAa/iCDfatos, etc. ; B QiKOivu; Luc. Jos. vii. 197 r(\nw- 
16, 5 D"'1in3, ® Baovp(()iiJ.; Luc. Xoppafi; Jos. vii. 207 Xcvpavov, Xaipufiov. 
^9, 38- 39 DnD3 (v. 41 fnD3), ® Xa/xaa/z, Xavaav : Luc. AxiH-aav, kx^vaafx, etc. ; 
Jos. vii. 274 Ax«A""'0''' 

• Klostermann, Die Biicher Sam. ti. Konige (1887), p. xl. Of course, this advice 
must be understood with the needful and obvious qualifications : it is not intended 
that everj'thing to be found in Lucian is to be indiscriminately preferred to the 
Massoretic text. There is undoubtedly wheat in Lucian, but there is also much 
chaff (cf. Torrey, Ezra Studies, 1910, 105 ff.); and it is the task of the textual critic 
to distinguish between them. 

The Complutensian Polyglott is based upon the text of Lucian. Holmes' MS. 
108 = Vatican 330 is the manuscript which was sent in 1513-14 by Leo X to Spain 
for the use of the editors of that Polyglott : the minutes relating to the loan and 
return of the MS. still exist in the Vatican Library (Delitzsch, Foj-tgesetzte Studien 
zur Entstehungsgesch. der Conipl. PolygL, Leipzig, 1886, p. 2). It does not, how- 
ever, reproduce MS. 108 exactly. Where the text of the MS. differs materially from 
the Heb. or the Vulg., it was constantly corrected, sometimes from other Greek 
MSS., sometimes from the Hebrew (see Rahlfs, p. 18 ff.). 
2 The '■ antiqua version See Comill, Ezechiel, pp. 37-42. 

^ The antiqua versio is based upon the LXX, and in particular on the recension 
represented by B. See Rahlfs, i. 84, 85 ; Raupp in Z.filr Ass. xvi. (1903), 329 (in 
a study, p. 296 ff., on the oldest Ethiopic MS. of Sam.-Kings, in the Borgio Museum 
at Rome ; the article contains also a collation of Dillmann's text). 

§ 3- 2, 3- Lucian, the Targums, and the Peshitto li 

30, 1 """laB, @ Boxo/)(€)f = Boxoptov of the Greek Jos. (vii. 278) : Luc. B(S- 
5a5(€)t, the Za/z'w Jos. Beddadi. 
21, 18 ^nOTn , @ o Atrcuet, o AffTarwett, etc. ; Luc. Jos. vii. 301 o X^TTafos. 

23, 8 '800"' [i Ch. II, II ' 300*], ® ' 800' : Luc. (both Sam. and Ch.), Jos. 

vii. 308 ' 900 '. 
23, II NpN, @ A7a, Acra, etc.: Luc. HXa, Jos. vii. 310 'HA.0C (genit.). 

24, 9 '800,000 + 500,000', so ®: Luc. (and Codd. 52, 236, 242, Cat. Nic), Jos. 

vii. 320 ' 900,000 + 400,000 'y 

2. The Targums are Aramaic Versions made for the use of the 
Jews, in Palestine or Babylon, when Hebrew ceased to be generally 
spoken. These are of various and not always certain date. Accord- 
ing to tradition, the Targum that was first committed to writing, 
in the first century, was that on Job ; but other of the Targums 
undoubtedly embody traditional interpretations that were current 
orally before they were definitely fixed in writing. The Targum was 
originally an extemporaneous translation and interpretation of succes- 
sive verses of Scripture, delivered by the ?9i'T'^? ^" ^^^ public worship 
of the Synagogue. From the circumstances of its origin it lent itself 
readily to expansion : edification, rather than literal translation, was 
the aim of the pj"iin»; and hence the very paraphrastic character 
which the Targum — especially that on the Latter Prophets — is apt 
to assume. In the historical books, however, except in poetical 
passages (as Gen. 49, Jud. 5, i Sam. 2, i-io, 2 Sam. 23, 1-7), the 
Targum is as a rule tolerably literal. The Targum on the Former 
and Latter Prophets is ascribed to Jonathan ben Uzziel ^ 

3. The Syriac Version, commonly known as the Peshitto ()l^ 
J-fc>.^-.i3 editio simplex), originated in the needs of the large Syriac- 
speaking population N. and NE. of Palestine, whose literary centre 
was Edessa. No historical details respecting its origin have come 
down to us : already Theodore of Mopsuestia (fourth cent.) declares 
that it is not known who translated the Scriptures into Syriac; but 
it is generally considered to date, at least in the main, from the early 
part of the second cent. a.d. Like the Septuagint, the Peshitto is 

^ On the alleged dependence of Luc. on Theodotion, see Smith, Comm., 402 ff. 

' For fuller particulars see the art. Targum (by E. Deutsch) in Smith's 
Dictionary of the Bible; Bacher in the ZDMG. xxviii, p. i ff. ; and art. TarGUM 
(T. Walker) in DB. 

e 2 

Hi Introduction 

not the work of a single hand ; and the style of the different books, 
or groups of books, varies. Mainly, no doubt, the translators were 
either Jews or, more probably, Jewish Christians. Thus the transla- 
tion of the Pentateuch, for instance, often adheres closely to ancient 
Jewish exegesis \ traces of which are also discernible in other books, 
especially in the Chronicles, the translation of which has additions 
and embellishments, imparting to it quite the character of a Targum ^ 
Job, on the other hand, is literal : while the translation of the Psalms 
is strongly influenced by the Septuagint, with which it often re- 
markably agrees, where both deviate from the Hebrew. 

4. We reach now the Latin Versions. Of these the first is the Old 
Latin Version, used by early Latin Fathers, as TertuUian (died c. 220), 
Cyprian (d. 257), Lactantius, Lucifer of Cagliari (d. 371), and 
Augustine '. This Version exists only in a more or less fragmentary 
form, derived partly from MSS., partly from quotations in the Fathers. 
Of the OT. the part most completely preserved is the Hexateuch, 
published (to Dt. 1 1, 4 *) by Ulysse Robert from a Lyons MS. (1881) : 
in the Books of Samuel only fragments are extant derived from the 
sources just named. Of these fragments, such as were known at the 
time were published by Sabatier in 1743 in his great work, BibUorum 
Sacrorum Antiquae Ver stones Latinae: Vercellone in 1864 in vol. ii 
of the Variae Leciiones Vulgatae Latinae BibUorum editionis printed 
other considerable extracts from the margin of a Gothic MS. at Leon 
in Spain"; three fragments, discovered in the bindings of some books 
at Magdeburg (II 2, 29 — 3, 5 [also i Ki. 5, 2-9^]) and Quedlinburg 
(I 9, 1-8^; 15, 10-17*), were edited by Von Miilverstedt in 1874"; 
two other fragments, discovered similarly at Vienna, were published 

^ See especially J. Perles, Meletemata Peschitthoniana (Vratislaviae, 1859). 
''■ Sig. Frankel, Die Syr. Obersetzung zu den BB. der Chronik (1879). 

* See fully, on this Version, H. A. A. Kennedy's comprehensive article, DB. 
iii. 47 ff.: comp. PRE? viii. 433-443 (Fritzsche) ; PRE? iii. 25-31 (Nestle). 

* On the continuation, see DB. iii. 49'', iv. 446*. 

" Variae Lectiones, ii. pp. xxi-xxii, 179, etc. : comp. i. pp. xciii-xcv. 

e Zeitschrift des Harzvereins, 1874, pp. 251-263. The two Quedlinburg frag- 
ments were re-edited by W. Schum in the Stud. u. Kritiken, 1876, p. 123 f. (i Ki. 
ji, gi>__6^jia jjas recently been recovered from the same source: A. Diining, Ein 
neues Fragment des Quedlinburger Ilala-Codexy 1888). 


§ 3. 4. The Old Latm Version liii 

in 1877^; in 1885 J. Belsheim edited some longer fragments (of 
other parts of the OT. as well as 1-2 Sam.) from a palimpsest MS. at 
Vienna ^ The Old Latin Version does not, as a rule, possess an 
independent value for the textual criticism of the OT., for it was not 
made immediately from the Hebrew, but was formed upon the Greek. 
As the extant parts of it shew that it existed in different recensions ', it 
becomes a matter of importance to inquire how these are related to 
one another, and upon what MSS., or family of MSS., of the LXX 
they are based. As will be shewn below (p» Ixxvi fF.), in the Books 
of Samuel the recensions which we possess are based upon a text 
agreeing with that of Lucian. 

More important for our present purpose is the Latin Version of 
Jerome, commonly known as the Vulgate *. Jerome began his labours 
as a translator by merely revising the Old Latin ; but ultimately made 
a new Version directly from the Hebrew. He had originally learnt 
Hebrew as a youth ^ and after having dropped the study for a while, 

* Augustissimae Bibliothecae Caesareae Regiae Palatinae Vindobonensis Prae- 
fedo Doctori Ernesto Birk munerum publicorum feliciter peracto XL annorum 
cyclo gratulantes qui a Bibliotheca sunt Veteris Antehieronymianae Versionis 
Libri II Regum sive Samitelis Cap. X. r8 — XI. 17 et Cap. XIV. i^-io prin- 
cipem editionem dedicant inlustratam Tabulis Photographicis (Vindobonae, 
MDCCCLXXvii). Cited as Vind.'. 

. ^ Palimpsestus Vindobonensis antiquissimae Vet. Test. Translationis latinae frag- 
menta e codice rescripto emit et primum edidit Johannes Belsheim Christianiae, 
1885 (i Sam. I, 14 — 2, 15. 3, 10 — 4, 18. 6, 3-15. 9, 21 — 10, 7. 10, 16 — II, 13. 
M, 12-34. 2 Sam. 4, 10—5, 25. 10, 13— II, i8- 13, 13— 14> 4- i7, la— 18, 9). 
Cited as Vind.^. (One column of this MS., containing II 11, 2-6, had been pub- 
lished previously, as a specimen, by Eichenfeld and Endlicher, Analecta Gram- 
matica, Vindob. 1837, p. ix.) For some other recently discovered fragments see 
DB. iii. 50*. 

' Regarded by some as independent versions: see PRE!^ viii. 434-6; DB. 
iii. 48-9. 

* On the Vulgate generally, see the elaborate article by Mr. (afterwards Bishop) 
Westcott in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible : on its relation to the Hebrew text of 
the OT. in particular, the careful monograph of W. Nowack, Die Bedeutung des 
Hieronymus fiir die alttestamentliche Textkritik (Gottingen, 1875), should by all 
means be consulted. See also H. J. White's art. Vulgate in DB. iv. p. 873 ff. 

* Preface to Daniel (printed at the beginning of editions of the Vulgate) ; Ep. 
125, § 12 (Migne, i. 1079), — an interesting passage, too long to quote. 

liv Introduction 

resumed it in his later years, after his migration to Bethlehem in 386. 
The Books of Samuel and Kings were published first {c. 393), but 
the whole work was not completed till 405. For the purpose of 
perfecting his knowledge of Hebrew, and also subsequently for 
assistance in the translation of particular books, Jerome engaged the 
help of Jewish teachers, to whom in his commentaries he more than 
once alludes', and from whom no doubt he derived the Rabbinical 
interpretations which occur from time to time in the pages of the 
Vulgate ". Though his Version was made afresh from the Hebrew, 
he did not disdain to avail himself of the labours of his predecessors, 
and consulted constantly the Greek Versions (both the LXX and Aq. 
Theod. Symm.), the renderings of which he frequently quotes and 
discusses. He was especially prone to be guided by Symmachus. 
Where the Vulgate exhibits a rendering which deviates alike from the 
Hebrew text and from the LXX, the clue to its origin will generally 
be found in one of the other Greek translations, especially in that of 
Symmachus (see pp. Ixxxi-lxxxiii). 

Note. — For the recovery of the original text of the LXX, much yet remains to 
be done (of. EB.'w. 5021 f.). The first step is the more accurate collation ofMSS. 
for the purpose, if possible, of grouping them in families, or recensions. Upon this 
field of study Lagarde (d. 1891) stood pre-eminent (comp. Cornill,£2(ff^.,p. 63): but 

1 Ep. 84, § 3 : Putabant me homines finem fecisse discendi. Veni rursum lero- 
solyma et Bethleem. Quo labore, quo pretio Baraninam nocturnum habui praecep- 
torem ! Timebat enim Judaeos, et mihi alteram exhibebat Nicodemum. Preface 
to Chron. : Denique cum a me litteris flagitassetis ut vobis librum Paralipomenon 
Latino sermone transferrem, de Tiberiade quemdam legis doctorem qui apnd 
Hebraeos admiration! habebatur assumpsi : et contuli cum eo a vertice, ut aiunt, 
usque ad extremum unguem ; et sic confirmatus ausus sum facere quod iubebatis. 
Preface to Job : Memini me ob intelligentiam huius voluminis Lyddaeum quemdam 
praeceptorem, qui apud Hebraeos primus haberi putabatur, uon parvis redemisse 
nummis. On Am. 3, 11 he alludes to the ' Hebraeus qui me in sacris Scripturis 
erudivit:' similarly on Zeph. 3, 8. Gal. 3, 14 al. On Hab. 2, 15 : Audivi Lyddae 
quemdam de Hebraeis qui sapiens apud illos et SfVTepouTtj^ [= X3n] vocabatur nar- 
rantem huiuscemodi fabulam, etc. On Zech. 14, 20 : Quod cum ab Hebraeo quaere- 
rem quid significaret, ait mihi, etc. 

* Comment, on Is. 22, 17 on "133 : Hebraeus autem qui nos in Veteris Testament! 
lectione erudivit ^a/Zf^w galliiiaceum transtulit. (See the Comm. of Rashi ad loc.) 
Comp. M. Rahmer, Die hebrdischen Traditionen in den Werken des Hieronymus 
(Breslau, 1861); continued (with reference to^Hosea) in Frankel's Monatschrift^ 
1865, pp. 216, 460; 1867, p. 107; 1868, p. 419. 

§ 4- The Vulgate Iv 

the task was greater than any single man, even with Lagarde's extraordinary powers of 
work, could accomplish ; and he was only able to point the way which others could 
follow (see Rahlfs, Sept. Siudien, iii. 3, 23-30). His mantle has fallen upon his 
pupil and successor at Gottingen, Alfred Rahlfs, who has published exhaustive 
investigations on the pre-Hexaplar LXX-text of 1-2 Kings, as inferred from Origen's 
citations ; on the text and MSS. of the Psalms ; and on Lucian's recension of 
1-2 Kings [Septuaginta-studien, i. 1904, ii. 1907, iii. 1911). See also O. Procksch, 
Siudien zur Gesch. der Sept. 1910 (on the text of the Prophets) ; andG. F. Moore's 
valuable article on the Antiochian Recension of the LXX in AJSL. xxix (Oct. 191 2), 
pp. 37-62. And, on the recovery of the Hebrew original of difficult LXX render- 
ings, see Margolis, Z/^ fF. 1905,311 ff., 1906, 85 ff., 1907, 255 ff.; ^yiSZ. xxii (Jan. 
1906), no ff., xxvi (Oct. 1909), 33 ff. ; Harper Memorial Studies (1908), i. I33ff. 

§ 4. C har a c ten's lies of Ihe Chief Ancient Versions of Samuel'^. 
I. The Septuagint. 

a. Features which presumably are not original elements in the 
Version, or due to the translators themselves. 

(a) Examples of double renderings (' doublets ') : these are fre- 
quently connected by Kat : — 
I I, 16 Luc. "'n^B' 3"1D = €K ■K\y]Oov<i dSoXto-^^ias [lov koL Ik TrXriBov<; 
a6vfiia<; fxov. 

1, 26 nDOy = €voj7rtov (Tov fierd crov, 

2, 24 yoB' "aiN IK'S nyotrn nniD n"i^ ■'3 'n bti = ix^, TeWa, on 

ovK dyaOrj rj olkot] r]v eyoj a.Kov<t),fJirj TroieiTC ovtu)<; otl ovk dyaOal at 
d/coai as cyw aKovw. 

4, 14-16^ (to vy ?n)=:[i4 Koi T]Kov(T€v 'HAet Trjv <f)(i)vr]v t^s j3orj<i 
Kol enrev Tt's r/ /3or] ttjs c^wvtjs TavTr]<;/ koI 6 dv6p<xyiro<; (TTrtuo-as 
elcrriXO^v kclI dirrjyyciXev rui HXcf 1 5 fo* HAei uios €V^vrjKovTa 
irwv, Kol ol 6<fi6aXfj.ol avTov iTravicTTrjcrav koX ovk l/SAcTrev*] Koi etTrev 
'HAet TOts dv8pd(TLv Tots TrapeKTTrjKocnv avTw Tis rj <fi(ovr] tov rj^ov^ 
TOVTOv ; 16 Kat 6 dvrjp cr7r€ucras TrpocrrjXocv HAei Kat ctTrev avrw. 
In LXX 14 is a doublet to 1^^-16^: i5b-i6a represent the 
original LXX of 14-16* Heb., 15 Heb. being accidentally 
omitted ; the omission was afterwards supplied, a closer ren- 
dering of 14 Heb. being given at the same time. 

5, 4 |nQDn"7N nim3 VT" niS3 '^r\^) = Kal dfx,(f>6T€pa rd L)(vr} x"pwi' 
avToO d(f)r)pr]fx.€va IttI to, lyiirpocrOia a/xa^e^ eKacrrot, /cat dfjitfiOTepoi 
oi KapTTol TU)V \€tpC)V avTov ircTTTOKOTes cTTi TO irpoOvpov. 

^ Only the more salient features can be noticed. 

Ivi Introduction 

6, 7 Luc. ?)]} DHvy iVy a? ")CN = av6ii twv TfTcy/Aevwv c^' as ovk 
hreTeOr] t,vyo<i {avev twv t6t. = b^]} Dn'hv n!? "IB'N We.). 

6, 8 ins Dnn^ti'1 = Kai c^aTroo-TtAeiTC avrrjv, kol dTreXacraTC avriyv. 

6, 12 Luc. lyjl I7n 13^n nnX n^DD3=cv rpiySw cv^eia eVopevovTO- 
cKOTTi'wv . . . ev oow /tia iTropevovTO Tropevovaai kol fiowcraL (ckott. = 

lyj; for iyj^). 

lO, 2 Luc. nvbX3 = /Aeo-7//i,/8ptas dAXo/i,evovs fxeydka (see note). 

14, 40 Luc. |n3i''i ""JNi inn nny^ vnn ons i'^<•^t^''< b i?N -idn^i 
ntyy T-rya aiun hNCJ* ^n Djrn )'^J2ii''\ nnx lay^ ^^-l3 '»33=Kai 

cTttc SaovX TravTi ctvSpi 'IcrparjX 'Yp.eis eo-ecr^e cis Soi^Aciav, Kat iyw 
Koi 'l(jova6av 6 rtos fJ.ov ea6fie6a €is SovAet'av. Kat elirev o Aaos Trpos 
Saoi^X To apiarov ivMirLov (rov ttoUl' kol cTttc 2aovA Trpos tov 
Xaov YficLS io-icrdc els tv p.4po<;, Koi eyw kol 'itavaOav iaop-eOa eis 
cv fxipa. Here a second translation, correcting the strange 
mistranslation of LXX, is inserted in the text out of its proper 

14, 47 n^vfOn *T3b = €Aa;(€v TOV fiaa-iXeveiv, KaTaKXTjpovrat Ipyov 

(nabon read as naben^naN^Bri) ». 

15, 3 V^jy ^Dnn xh l!? IB'N b nX DnCnnni = Kat lepayx Kal Trdvra 
Ttt auTou Kai ov TrepiTroLrja-rj i^ avTov Koi iioXcOpevcrcis avrdv* Kat 
avaOefiariets avTov Kat Trdvra rd avrov Kat ov cf>ei(rr] oltt avrov. 
Here each verb is rendered twice (e^oXc^p.=D''"inn as vv. 9. 
15 al.), Dn»"inni being represented moreover a third time by 
Kat le/Det/i. 

16, 16 "p 21151 = Kat dya^dv o-oi eo-rat Kat dvaxrawet ae. (The com- 
bination of two renderings, though accepted by Th. as the 
original text, has the effect, as We. remarks, of putting the 
effect before the cause.) 

18, 28 Luc. inninN hs'tJ'Tia biD1 = Kat [MeXxoA. ri SvyaTyjp avrov 
kol] Trds 'IcrparjX r^yaTra avrov. Here by the side of the genuine 
LXX rendering is inserted a second translation expressing the 
later (and corrupted) Hebrew text : see note. 

20, 9 "l''7y = €7rt ae . , . cis rds TrdXcis orov (T'ly). 

* Lucian combines the two renderings rather cleverly : icaTait\j)povTai to epyov tov 
^aaiXfvftv: cf. I2j 2 (the addition of l/c tow pw). 16, 20 (p. Iviii). 17, 2. 21, 12. 

§ 4- I- ^- Characteristics of the Septuagint Ivii 

21, 14 (13 LXX) *iyB>n nini'T bv irr-i dti b!?nn''i=Kai Trpoo-- 

e-n-oirjaaTO iv rrj rjixepa iKetvr), kol cTV/xTravt^ci' ( = ^II^'l) ctti rats 
6vpaL% T-^s xoA.€a)S Ktti 7rape<^ep€T0 €V rais xipiTcv avrov Kai cttitttcv 
€7ri Tots ^vpas T^9 TToAews. Each verb is represented in the 
Greek twice. 
23, I niJIJiTDN D''DB' n?3m = Kat avTol SiapTra^ovcnv KaTairaTov(riv 
Tors aAws- (/<aTa7raTeo>=nDtJ' 14, 48; =00^^ 17, 53-) 
II 6, 2 miiT' vySO^aTTO Twv dp^^ovrwv 'lovSa iv dva^acrti (i.e. HpyOS 
for ^bv2'0 [see p. Ixvii] ; Klo.'s view is less probable) \ 
While ' doublets ' are thus not infrequent even in Cod. B, they are 
pecuHarly characteristic of the recension of Lucian ^ When Lucian 
found in his MSS. two divergent renderings of a passage, he sys- 
tematically combined them, producing thereby what would be called in 
the terminology of New Testament criticism ' conflate ' readings. As 
my friend, Prof. Sanday, reminds me, this method of combining 
different readings is characteristic of the Syrian school of critics, from 
whom the modern 'Textus Receptus' of the NT. is essentially 
derived. The application of the same method, at approximately the 
same time and place, to the text of both Testaments must be due 
to some common influence, even if (as has been conjectured ^) it be 
not Lucian himself to whom the Syrian recension of the NT. is due. 

{S) Corruptions originating in the Greek text itself in the process 
of transmission. Where by the change of one or two letters the 
Greek may be brought into conformity with the Hebrew, it is more 
probable, as a rule, that the variation originated in the Greek only 
(especially if it is one that might be facilitated by the context), than that 
it is due to a difference in the Hebrew text used by the translators : — 
I 4, 19 yn^ni cKXawev from w/cXao-ev (We.): see i Ki. 8, 54. 19, 
18. — 9, 24 Dn*l r]\\iy](j€v (probably) a corruption of {Ji/^oxrcv (cf. {n/^ow 

1 See also the notes on I 20, 30 (Luc). 27, S^ II 13, 16. 14, 6. 15, 17 f. 19, 
44. 20, 18-19. 22. 21,1. 5. For doublets connected by ^, see Margolis, AJSL. 
XXV (July, 1909), p. 259; and cf. II 19, 43 «. 

2 Add, from Lucian, I i, 6. 2, 11. 4, 18. 6, 8. 7, 16. 8, 8. 12. 10, 27"— 11, 1". 
12, 2. 3. 14, 7. 33. 15, 29. 32. 16, 14. 18. 17, 2 (ouTO(= n^N). 18. 32. 25, 14.41 
end. 26, 17. 27, 8*. 28, 23. 31, 9 etc. 

5 Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, ii. 138. For 
examples of ' conflate ' readings, see ib., p. 94 ff. 

Iviii Introduction 

2 Ki. 2, 13. 6, 7), induced by the context. — 10, 2 pD^J3 7U33 eV 
Tw opei for €v Tw opto) ^ — 13, 4 Ipy^'M av€/3r](rav corrupted likewise 
through the influence of the context for dvefSorjo-av {^PV.'^}\ — LXX do 
not recognize the Nif. of this verb: cf. 11, 7). So 14, 20 dve/3r} for 
ave(36y](T€ (as in A). — 14, 5 (see note). — z'd. ?)12 bis, epxo/Aevo) 'to one 
coming . . .,' from l^^ofx^vov close to (so Luc), which represents 71D 
Nu. 22, 5. Dt. II, 30. — 14, 45 Luc. tAeoi/ (from 6 Aaos [^^V read as 
Oy] to bring the meaning into some relation with the context). — 
15, 23 Oepd-n-eiav (from 6(.paj^iv). — 1 6, 20 Luc. yd/xov (from yofxop, 
adapted so as to harmonize with "ilDH = ovov). — 17, 40 reXctous (from 
Aeiovs). — 18, 7 njijyni Luc. iiT^pxovro (for i^pxov). — 21 Luc. ev rais 
Swafxecrtv (for Svalv A). — 20, II NX31 kol peeve for /cat tiop-ev (We.). — 
15 evpeOyjvai prob. for eiapOrjvaL (as A). — 26, lO TraiSevcrr] (for Traiar]). 
— II 17, 9 B0YNI2N from BO0YNI2N. — 16 KaTaireicrp (for KaraTTLy). — 
23, 8 o-TjoaTtcoTas (probably for Tpavyaarias : see V. 18). — 9 dve^6r](Tev 
(for dvefi-q: cf. the reverse change above) ^ Cf. II 14, 20 SdXov. 

Compare from other books : 2 Ki. 3, 21 npyDI iTljn *lJn 7313 IpJJlf^l «ai di-e- 
poijffav tK iravTos ■ntpu^wa^iivoi (wvtjv Kal fTnov 'CI for Kal iTrdvcw under the influence 
of the preceding (incorrect) dvfPorjcrav; 23, 5. 11 n3kJ'''1 KareKavae for Kartnavaf ; 
^. 4, 8 nyD awc^ KapTTov for diro Kaipov ; 17, 14 D^J3 ly^tJ''' exopraaOrjoav vfiaiv^ 

* Luc. «»' Tois opiois. The same corruption Jud. 2, 9 (Cod. A). ;^. 78, 54*. Ez. 11, 
10. II : the converse one Mai. i, 3. 

' Comp. in proper names; I 5, i APevvrjp; 17, i 'iSovfiaias ; 21, 2 (see note) 
A0(in(\fx', 25, 43 (B). 29, II (A, B, Luc.) ^NVir 'lapcnjK; 25, 44 Luc. rw (k 
ro\iaO; 30, 14 ri\Pov(; II 2, 2 al. Axt^oo/x ^ 'IffparjKfiTis ; 8, 7 'It po&oan ; 10,6.8 
n^yO A^ta\i]K; II, 21. 22 A0fifif\ex "'O" 'l€/)0i3oa|ji, ; 12, 30 MeXx"^ (usually for 
P3^JD) ; 14, 27 end AI3ta9ap. 

Sometimes, also, constantly, as ?''y3N A^tyaia (no doubt A for A) ; ?3'0 
me\xo\; T\Z'y^"'ii 'le^oaOi (but in II 3-4 M«ji<})ij3oa0€) ; DnN"*l3y A^tSSapa 
(Luc. 'A0e5SaSav) ; y2t^Tl2 Brjpaa^tf ; I Ki. 1-2 (throughout) H^JIN Luc. 0/)vja 
(cf. II 3, 4 B OpvfiK, A Opvias). Comp. pj Nat;?;. But where the incorrect form 
is constatit, it is probable that it is due generally to the translators, and is not a 
mere error of transcription. 

3 Whence saturati sunt porcina found its way into some copies of the Old Latin 
Version, and is mentioned by Augustine, e. g. IV. 73 (Bened.) ' ubi dictum est 
"saturati sunt porcina" non nulla exemplaria "saturati sunt filiis" habent : ex 
ambiguo enim graeco interpretatio duplex evenit ' (quoted by Lagarde in his Probe 
finer neuen Ausgabe der lateinischen Obersetzungen des Alien Testaments, Gottin- 
gen, 1885, p. 40). 

§ 4- I- 8- Characteristics of the Septuagint lix 

(swine's flesh!) from vISjv ; 31, 16 'Dfiy ol KXfjpoi /xov from ol Kaipoi /xoy ; 39, 6 
ninSCS iraXoiay from naKataras (as A) ; 44, 13 DH^ITIDS ff rofj dA.aA.d7/tao-1i' aiTwv 
itomaXKay ^aiv'^ ; 49,9 ^ini f/fOTriacrei' from iKoiraatv (see Amos 7, 5) ; 69, 27 T^^H 
Tpav/jtarwy fj.ov from TpavfiaTiaiv aov ; 89, 21 '•K^lp [05^3 ej/ lAe'ei 07(0) from lAai'a; ; 
I39> 9 "^'^ fo'^' ^p^oi/ from kut' opOpov (A) ; Jer. 15, 10 U IJJ'J K^ 'TT'K'J N? 
oi/T€ w<pi\r]aa, ovre w(pe\r](jfu ixe ovSeis, already noted by Origen as a ypa<piK6i' 
cLfmpTTjfxa for wcpuKrjaa, ui(pei\rjaiv ; 2 Ch. 18, 2 ^7d7ra from -quaTa (so MS. 243: 
Margolis, ZAW. 1907, 226). Cf. p. 78 «.; Thackeray, 36-38; and esp. Margolis, 
ib. 225 ff. 

b. Features due presumably to the translators themselves : — 

(a) The translators are apt to be very literal, representing Hebrew 
expressions not by idiomatic Greek equivalents, but by word-for-word 
renderings: thus I 3, 6 irpoa-iBiTO koI eKaAeo-ev; 8 al. Trpoa-eOero 
xaXecrat ; II 2, 28 al. npoaeOeTO tov . . . — 3, 10 al. DyS3 DySS ws aTra^ 
Koi a7ra|. — 4, 7 al. DtJ'PB' 7lOnX e^^h Kot rpiT-qv. — id. (see note) ^n^^ 
nSD yeyove TOiavrr]. — 6, 7 ^^'''o OTTtcrOev auTwv. — 7> ^ H-V TapacrtcoTnjo'r;? 
d<^' i7yu,aJv ToG fJiT) /?oav. — 7) ^4- '7) ^ ^^' P^'' . • • P^ ai'tt fJL^o-ov . . . Kai 
ava fxicrov. — 1 8, 2 2 '3 ^SPl OeXeiv iv ; 25 fiovXecrOaL ev. — 20, 21 "JOD 
njni aTTO croC Kttt wSc. — 2 2 nN/ni ^OD dTro aov koI iireKCiva. — 24, 7 
fj.rjSafxC)'; fiOL irapa Kvpcov (nin^D), €i Troirja-oi . . . — 28, 1 7 XoActv €»» x^'^pi 
rivos. — II 18, 4 "lytiTl Ti /'N dkd X^^P'^ ^^5 7n;A>;s. — 24, 3 DHai Qn3 
wa-irep airovs /cat watrep aiiToiis (contrast Dt. I, li — by a different 
hand — D33 d)S eo-re x''^'-'^'"'^"-^^^'^)- 

The pron. *3JS (when expressed, in the Hebrew) is (after II 7) seven 
times represented curiously by the substantive verb : — 

II II, 5 cyw v.p.1 Iv yacTTpl ex"^ > ^^> 7 '^'^' ^y^ ^'/^' ipvcrdfjirjv ere] 
15, 28 eyw €lfit (; 1 8, 12 Kat cyco flfxi icrrrjfx.i; 20, 17 Akovw 
eyoi et/AiJ 24, 12 rpiia eycu €iyu,t aipw €7rt ere J 1 7 tSou eyw €t/xt rj^LKrjaa^. 
Comp. 7, 29 oTt (TV el . . . iXdX.rjaa'i^. 

^ Comp. Land, Anecdota Syriaca, iv. 190 : and Field's note adloc. 

2 Also Jud. 5, 3. 6, 18. II, 27. 35. 37. Ru. 4, 4. I Ki. 2, 2. 2 Ki. 4, 13. 10, 9. 
22, 20. Ez. 36, 36 A (dub.); and occasionally in Aq. and Theod. (Hatch-Redpath, 
Concord., p. 367). Thackeray {Journ. of Theol. Stud. 1907, 272 f.; cf. Grammar, 
p. 55) thinks that the usage is due to an attempt to represent 'DJK (as distinguished 
from ^3K) ; but though it does always express ^33S, except a Ki. 10,9. 22, 20. Ez. 
36, 36, it by no means stands for ^^3^^ uniformly. 

' From II 2, 7 (incl.) there is a singular change in the rendering of D3, which is 
now often represented by Kat 7? : II 2, 7. 11, 12,14. I3>36- 14j6-7- 
15, 20. 24. 16, 23. 17, 5. 10. 12. 16. 18, 2. 22. 26. 27. 19, 20. 40. 43. 20, 16. 21, 
20, (So before in A and Luc. but not in B, as I i, 6 L. 8, 8 L. 18, 5 A L. 19, 

Ix Introduction 

{b) They even translate not unfrequently wholly regardless of the 
sense: — I I, 26 ""3 Iv ifJioL — 5, 6 U^^'') koI iir-qyayev avrois (^^V'^l, 
the suffix construed as a dative: GK. § 117^). — 8, 3 yV3n """iriN 6irio-w 
T^s o-wreXctas. — 8, 16 inaN^D^ HB'jn koX aTroSeKaTwcrct ("'E'V'!) ci? Ta 
€pya avTov. — 12, 2 ''Jjl^Kn Kai KaOrjuoiiai (^^^t\). — 12, 25 ISBR tt/joo-tc- 
Orjijiijdi (as though ISpn from ^P^) : so 27, i. — 14, 38 tus ywvt'as toi5 
'lo-paT^A. — 14, 40 "I^J^P CIS SovXctav ([njnnj?^). — 15, II 7rapaK€KX7)ixaL 
(so II 24, 26 TrapeKXrjOr] : Dn2 = TrapaKaXcco ; hence TrapaKeKXrjfiai 
derived mechanically to express the Ni/al). — 18, 21 ""nni koX tjv (T^iil) 
cTTt ZaouX (!) x^'-P o.XXo(f)vX(iiv. 

(c) A Hebrew word not understood, or treated incorrectly as a 
proper name, or if of a technical character, is often transliterated : 
I I, 24 oi^t, vefteX [10, 3 aa-Kov]. — 2, 18 €<j>ov8 fiap. — 28 al. €(j)ov8 [in 
the Pent, regularly €7r<u/Ats]. — 32 (Cod. A) Kparaiiafxa fx,ov(Dv. — 9, 12. 13 
al. Ba/Att. — 10, 5 al. vaftXa. — 13, 3 NacrctjS. — 1 4, I eis Meaa-a/i twv 
dXXo^wXwv (but 13, 23 vTToo-Tao-is). — 6. II. 12. 15 Mecra-acfi. — 23 t^v 
Ba/iwd. — 33 iv TeOOaifx. (for DPI"]?! !).— 16, 20 yo/xop {see note). — 17, 
18 Luc. €pov/3a. — '20, 19 Trapa to epya/3 iKcivo, — 20 cts rrjv Ap/xarrapci. 
— 21 yov^av. — 41 oLiro Tov apya/S. — 25, 18 ol^l, yofiop. — 32. 39 Luc. 
Bapovx-—30, 8. 15. 23 ytSSovp (for H^a).— II 3, 33. 34 Na/3aX.— 
12, 31 Luc. p^Dl iv MaSe/3^a (no doubt A for A).— 15, 28 and 17, 
16 Apa/3ui0. — 15, 32 Iws ToS 'Pows (Luc. 'Pws: so 16, i); 17, 19 
apa^xaO. — 29 (ra<ji(f)0)9. — 21, 20 MaSwv. — 23, 9 Luc. ev ^eppafi (for 
DSnnn). — 13 ets KaSwv. — 24, 7 Maxffap. Cf. Thackeray, Grammar, i. 


And so in other books : as Gen. 28, 19 Tv D?1N1 «ot OvXaixfiavs (!). Jos. 7, 24 
"iDy pDV 'EfKKaxoip. Jud. 1, 19 Dn? PT"I3 33*1 '3 on 'Frjxa^ 5te(TT(i\aro ainots. 3, 3 
nCn t<13^ IV ecos Aa)3co E/iaS. 6, 26 tiyO Maovf/f. 8, 7 a^apKT)V(iv. 9, 27 «ai tiro«V 
aav iWovXein. 41 tr Aprjixa. 18, 29 B"? D?1N1 «at OvXafiais. 20, 48 OnO "I^JJ^D 

24 A. 24, II L. II 2, 6 A. 3, 19 A ; and in other books sometimes in B, as Jud. i , 
22. 2, 10. 17. 3, 22 al. I Ki. I, 6. 48 al.) 

1 The transliteration of Hebrew words is also characteristic of Theodotion ; 
Field, Hexapla, I. xxxix-xlii ; Swete, p. 46 ; C. C. Torrey, Ezra Studies, Chicago 
(1910), pp. 66-81, 339 (who argues from the frequency of such transliterations in 
the Septuagint of Chr. Ezr. Neh. that the ' LXX ' translation of these books is really 
Theodotion's : a conclusion which is accepted by Moore, AJSL. xxix, p. 54, but 
which, for reasons stated by him, appears doubtful to Rahlfs, Studicn, iii. 85 f.). 

§4- I- I). Characteristics of the Septuagint Ixi 

a-no irdXtoK J>U0\a. 2 Ki. 2, 14 Xlfl ^H d(p<pcti. 3, 4 IpJ vwktjO. IO, 10 N1DN d<^(fw. 
12, 5-7 /8€5f/(. 9 [see Stade, ZA TfV. 1885, p. 289 {.=Akad. Keden ii. Abhandl. 193, 
199 ; and Kittel, ad loci. 23, 4 niCTti' aaXrjixtud (A for A), 5 xoifxapdn, fia{ovpai9, 

Sometimes the translation and transliteration are found side by side, 
giving rise to a species of doublet : — I 5, 4 (p. Iv) a/jiacfxO. — 6, 8 iv 
B^fiaTL fiepexOav (A apyo^). — 1 1. 15 ^at to defxa tpyafS (A apyol). — 7, 4 
Ta oAcn; Aarrapwd (JinriB'yn, as V. 3. 12, IO, taken as=n'nB'Kn, which 
is regularly rendered aXa-rj). — 10, 5 dvao-T€/u,a .... Nao-ct^. — 14, 25 
laaA (see note). — 15, 3 lepeip, (p. Ivi). — 8 lepeip. aireKTeivev (for 
D^inn). — 32 Luc. €^ Ava6<t)$ Tpe/xwv. — 21, 2 iv tw tottw tw Aeyo/xeVo) 
®eov TTto-Tis (as though ^J9(^) ''-) ^e^Aavci Mac/iwrt (for '':i5Q D1pD3 
*3D/N). — 7 (Tuve^^oyLievos Neecro-apav ("^^Vv)* — ^3' ^4 ^^ Mao"€p€/A cv tois 
frrevois (for nni*G)3 read as m~l^*JD3). — 19 iv Mea-aapa iv rots crTevois 
(for rihJfOn). — 24, 23 €ts T^v Meo-crapa crrevTJv (for nn^ifGH"???). 

{d) There is a tendency in the version to make slight additions for 
the purpose of giving an explanation or otherwise filling out the 
sense : thus I l, 5 + on ovk rjv avrrj -n-atSt'ov. id. +iTr€p ravrrjv. 14 (to 
iraiodpLOv) HAei. id. + /cat iropevov iK irpoa-tiy-irov Kvpiov. 2 1 + ev 
St/Aw/x. 2, 12 'HXet (^Tov U'peojs). 28 end+eL<; (SpCxTLv. 29 (dvatSet) 
6<f}6aXtJHo (see note). 5, 12 01 (^wvtcs koL) /jlt] diroOavovTe^. 9, 15 + 
Trpos avTOv. IO, 4 8vo (d7rap;^as) dproyv. II, IO Trpos Noas (tov 
'Ap.p.avLTriv). 15, l7+7rp6s 2aouA. 23^. 16, 12 dya^os opdaet 
(/cvptco) ; and afterwards + Trpos Sa/Aoir/jA and oti oStos €crTtv (dya^ds). 
17, 36. 43 + 'fat ciTTC AauctS Ov)(l dAA 7; ^etpwv kwos. 19, 8 + 7rpos 
2aovA. 20, 28 €is ^rjOXce/JL (t^v ttoAiv aiJToC TropevOrjvaL). 21, 4 end+ 
KOI (ftdyeraL. 25, 26 toG /at/ eA^etv eh alfxa {^dOwov), 31 end-\- 
dyadwcraL avrrj. 

{e) Hebrew writers are apt to leave something to be supplied by 
the intelligence of their readers : thus the subject of a verb is often 
not expressly named, and the object is either not named or indicated 
merely by a pronoun, the context, intelligendy understood, sufficiently 
fixing the meaning. In such cases, however, there was a temptation 
sometimes even to a scribe of the Hebrew, but still more to a trans- 
lator, to facilitate the comprehension of the reader, or to preclude 
some misapprehension which he contemplated as possible, by inserting 
explicitly the imperfectly expressed subject or object. Cases in which 

Ixii Introduction 

MT. and LXX vary in the presence or absence of subject or object 
are numerous. Thus I 2, 28 IHN rov oXkov tov Trar/jos a-ov. — 3, 18^ 
"ICN""^ Kcu cTttcv 'HXct. — 6, 20" KoX 7r/309 Ti'va dvaftyaerai (ki/Jcotos KvpLOV) 
d^' rjfjiwv/ 9, 6 TO TratSapiov. — 24 Kai €1776 (2a/xovr/X tw 2aoi;X). — 12, 5 
DrivN "1DX"'1 Kttt ctTre ^a/xovrjX tt/dos tov Aaov. — 15> 27 Kat iKparrja-e 
{'XaovX). — 16, 12 innCJ'JD ^laov tov Aax;€t8, etc. 

Hence Wellhausen lays down the canon that ' if LXX and MT. 
differ in respect of a subject, it is probable that the original text had 

I 2, 20^ 1D1pJ27 "l3Pni, LXX KOL a-n-yXOev o av^pcoTros €ts tov tottov 
avTov. The original text was )'l2)p^b ']br\). — 7, 14 i'X'lB''' b'»Xn f^Mi nxi 
DTlK'r'S *T'D, LXX Kot TO opiov 'lo-parjX d<^€iXavTO ktA. Both MT. 
and LXX may be accounted for by the assumption of an original ns) 
D^ntr^Q 1>D b^^n iSaJ.— 10, 22 li'Nt:'^, LXX Kal iTrrjpwrrjo-ev ^afxovrjX. 
The original text had i'NB'''1. — 11, 9 D''3xbDb 'nJ2N''1, LXX koI ctTrev 
Tots dyyeXois. Originally 1DX''1, here best read as a singular 'on 
account of the definiteness of the message' (We.). — 15 13''b?D''1, LXX 
KOL €)(picr€ ^afjiovrjX. — 17, 39^ IvyO IH DID""!, LXX /cai d(jiaipov(TLv 
al^Ta aTr' avTov. Originally only V^yo niC), fixed in MT. to a sing, 
by the addition of 1)1, read by LXX as D"}D^1. — 30, 20 in np"'1 
INVn-^a-ns, LXX koL IAa/?ev TrdvTa to. iroipjvLa. IH almost certainly 
a false ' Explicitum : ' see the note. 

c. On the Orthography of the Hebrew Text used by LXX (comp. 
above, p. xxviii ff.). 

{a) The number of cases in which LXX and MT. differ in respect 
of the number of a verb, or in which the MT. itself has one number 
where the other would be expected, makes it probable that there was 
a time when the final consonant was not always expressed in writing, 
and that when the scripHo plena was introduced an (apparent) singular 
was sometimes left, which ought to have become a plural. The 
omission was in some cases made good by the Massorites in the Qre, 
but not always. 

Nu. 13, 22 innn *iy Nn^i nan ^by^i (read inti). 32, 25 ^n ion^i 

piNI ''J31 13. 33, 7. Jud. 8, 6. I Sam. 9, i^. 19, 20 NTl (of the 
D''3NbjO just mentioned), LXX koX cTSav. i Ki. 13, 11 133 Nn""! 
lb"1DDM (the sequel DiTinN^ DnSD"'! shews that 'h '}^'0''\ "133 Ni3"'1 must 

§ 4- 1- c. Character of Hebrew Text used by the LXX Ixiii 

have been intended : cf. LXX ep^ovrai ol viol avrov koI Siriyrja-avTo). 
2 2, 49 (probably ^bn and ri1''3Nn "iTk^J ''3 were intended by the author). 
ip. 79, 7 IDC^n , , . b^a (contrast the plurals in Jer. lo, 25^). 

The correction is made in the Qre {Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 119), Gen. 27, 29 
innB'''1 ; 43, 28 innt^l inp^l ; Jud. 21, 20. i Sam. 12, 10. 13, 19 DTIK'^^D nOK ^"2, 

1 Ki. 9, 9. 12, 7. 2 Ki. 20, 18 np"" (as Is. 39, 7 mp"" ; but the sing, may here stand : 
LXX \r)ixxpiTcu). Est. 9, 27 (contrast t*. 23). Ezr. 3, 3. 

Elsewhere the sing, may be explained by the principle noticed on I 16, 4 : Gen. 
42, 25 p nrh t^'y'''l sc. nC'iyn (LXX Kal ifevr,eri; b^y^l would be unnatural). 

48, 1 fiDV^ ncx'i sc. noixn (Lxx «a( dnrjyyixrj = ncN_>i). 2 "icx^i . , , ipi] 

(LXX aitr}yyi\r) bi ... Ktyovres). 

Conversely MT. sometimes has a plural where LXX (not always 
rightly) read as a singular: I 7, 13 Cnc^^D wy\ LXX Kal iTairei- 
vtoo-cv Kvpio9 (comp. p. Ixii). — 10, 23 innp''1 lifl^l, LXX both sing., 
i.e. innp"! p-'l. — 12, 9b 03 "H^n^^l, LXX Kat i-n-oXe/Jirja-ev.—ig, 21 
nri, LXX Ktti aTrrryyiXr] (n3>l— read in MT. as n3>1, by LXX as 
ns^l: so I Ki. I, 23). — 30, lb •|S-i:j".i . . . 13^1 . . . lotj^Q V^^VI. LXX 
all sing, (as MT. itself sometimes in similar cases: 15, 6 "'Jp "iDM, 
Nu. 14, 45. Jud. 6, 3). — 20^ nrON'il, LXX Kal eAeyero ("IJ^N'-I, i.e. 
either litpN*! or "10N»1 — the latter not idiomatic ; cf. p. ^8). — 2 1^ bn^''), 
LXX Kol rjpu)Tr](Tav avTov (the subject is the men left behind). Comp. 
Gen. 25, 25 )^]} )^^ IXIp^l, LXX €Vajvo>acTcv : z;. 26 (in a similar 
context) MT. has N1p''1, LXX tVaAco-ev. 

The correction is made in the Qre {Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 120): Jos. 6, 7 
DI?n ^K {'''S^ ION"'"!) IIDK''"! (the subject is Joshua). 9, 7 (""^p 10N''1) nON^I 
PNTJ'"' {^N (the correction is here unnecessary), i Sam. 15, 16. i Ki. 12, 3. 21. 

2 Ki. 14, 13 pQ-'l Di):^T« (np Sn^l) 1X3'^ . . . tTDn, lxx «aJ ^A.fl«r. Ez. 46, q'^ 
1K2f* (10'' strangely not made). Neh. 3, 15 (comp. v. 14). 

The case is particularly clear in some of the instances in which the 
phrase aTrtyf^ihr] (or avrjyyeXr]) AeyovTfs occurs. This Strange con- 
struction Kara (rvv€cnv ^ might be supposed to have been forced upon 
the translators when they found what would only naturally be read 
by them as ibN.b li^\ I 15, 12. 19, 19. II 6, 12. 15, 31 (MT. T:n). 
19, I. I Ki. I, 51 ^: but it is scarcely credible that they should have 

^ Winer, Grammar of NT. Greek, § lix. 11. 

* So also Gen. 22, 20. 38, 13. 24 (cf. 45, 16. 48, 2). Jos. 10, 17. Jud. 16, 2 (in 
MT. 13 >1 has dropped out), i Ki. 2, 29. 41 (without IDsb). 

Ixiv Introduction 

gone out of their way to use it for what in MT. stands as IION^ ITTI 
I 14, 33. 23, I. 24, 2 (AcydvTcov). II 3, 23. I Ki. 2, 39: in these 
instances, therefore, it can hardly be doubted that the original text had 
simply nn, which was read by LXX as *12.'!, but in MT. was resolved 
into n3>l. 

{b) The MSS. used by the LXX translators — except, probably, in 
those parts of the OT. which were translated first — must have been 
written in an early form of the square character \ That it was not 
the unmodified archaic character appears clearly from the frequency 
with which letters, which have no resemblance to one another in that 
character, are interchanged in many parts of the Septuagint. For 
the same reason it can hardly have been very similar to the Egyptian 
Aramaic alphabet illustrated above. It was no doubt a transitional 
alphabet, probably a Palestinian one, of a type not greatly differing 
from that of Kefr-Bir'im (p. xxiii). In this alphabet, not only are 
"I and "I remarkably alike ^ but also 3 and 3 , and 3 and » (of which 
there are many clear instances of confusion in the Septuagint): n, n, 
and the final D also approach each other. *1 and "1 resemble each 
other in most Semitic alphabets : so that from their confusion — next 
to that of 1 and 1 , the most common in LXX — little can be inferred 
respecting the alphabet used ^. 

^ So long ago Gesenius, Gesch. d. Heb. Sprache n. Schrift (1815), p. 158 ; for a 
more recent opinion, see K. Vollers in the ZA TW. 1883, p.' 230 f. 

* They are also alike, it may be observed, in the late type of the archaic char- 
acter in which mn'' is written in the fragments of Aquila mentioned above (p. iii) : 
see p. 1 5 in Burkitt's edition. 

' It is true, the Kefr-Bir'im alphabet is considerably later than the LXX (as the 
scriptio plena alone would shew), but the Inscription of B*ne Hezir, and those 
alluded to p. xxii, note l, appear to shew that an alphabet not differing from it 
materially was in popular use in Palestine at least as early as the Christian era : 
and if more abundant records had been preserved it would probably be found to 
begin at an earlier period still. The confusion of "• and 1, and "0 and 3 (which 
cannot be explained from the old character) is in the Pent, so uncommon that it 
may be due to accidental causes : the books in which it is frequent can only have 
been translated after the change of character had been effected ; the Pent., as tradi- 
tion states, may have been translated earlier. Possibly a large and discriminating 
induction of instances (in which isolated cases, especially of proper names, should 
be used with reserve) might lead to more definite conclusions. 

§ 4- I- c. Character of Hebrew Text used by the LXX Ixv 

Examples of letters confused in LXX : — 

(a) MT. \ LXXl : II 23, 7 i6^^ Kal7rX^pe?( = N^f:i) : MT. \ LXX > : 
I 2, 29 Jiy[jD] 6<fiOaX[jiQ (= py). 12, 2 (p. Ix). 19, 22 13:j'3 iv 5e<^ei 

( = '•3:^3). 24, 16 nTil yevoiTo (=n''n"'): both changes together, 12, 3 
13 ""J^y a7roKpL0r]Te Kar e/jiov ( = ""3 IJy). 

Very clear examples are afforded by the Psalms : MT. ^ LXX 1 : — 
ij/. 2, 6 "'3^0 ""riSpa KaTea-Td6r}v ySao-iAevs vtt' a{ToO = ^3!'P ^J????- 
1 6, 3 ''VSn ?3 TrdvTa to, OeXrjfjiaTa arTo{;:=1VSn~?3. 
20, lO 13 jy Kol l-rraKOVfTOV i7/xa>v = 133yi. 
2 2, 17 nN3 wpi;^av = 1"IN3. 
32, 4 pp dKavOav=YS\>. 

35, 16 ""jy? c^efJLVKTrjpi(jdv ^e^Uyb. 

36, 2 13^ 3ip3 eV cai;Tui = 13b 3np3. 

38, 12 '•yjj ^yyto-av = iy33. (see 32, 6. 88, 4). 

45, 12 1? ''innB'ni Kal Trpoo-Kwr^o-ouo-tv aur(jj = 1? 11^^l^'^1. 

46, 5 ''33ti^^ Cnp rjyiaare to (TKT/vw/Aa a{iT0i):=lJ3y''? ^"^i?. 

50, 2 1 niM dvo/xtav=ni^n (see 52, 2). 

58, 4 3t3 n31 iXdXya-av if/ev8y = 20 1131. 

69. 33 D''^^^< ''5J''11 €K^7;T7^0-aT€ = V^m. 

73, 7 ^^^''V aSt/cta airojv = I'^Jiy . 

10^ icy 6 Xa6<; fiov^'^D]}. 
76, 12-13 1V3^ :X"l1Ci? Tw </)0^ep(o /cat d<^atpou/A€Vw = "'??3l Niub. 
88, 16 71OS ^nstyj vif/w6els 8k iTaireLvw6r]v='^^^^ '•jpSE': (see Lev. 
25, 39, and cf. if/. 106, 43). 

90, 16 'IXTI Kttt tSe=nx"ii. 

91, 6 nitJ'^ Kat Sai/xovtoi; = 1??''l (see 106, 37). 
12 2, 6 r^C-'' Kai €v^7/via = nip^1 (z;. 7). 

144, 15^ nii'N eyuaKa/ato-av = li^i^, — a passage which shews how 
scrupulously the LXX expressed what they found in 
their MSS.; for in the parallel clause ''Tt^'N^/xaKdptos. 
Add Is. 29, 13 '31 TIN DnNI"' '•nni fxdrrjv 8e a-e^ovrai fie ktX. (so Mt. 
15, 8; Mk. 7, 6)=m- DrNT inh]. 

Jer. 6, 9 l^^iy ^^ly KaXafidaOe KaXaixa(T$€ = ^bb'\V 'th^y. 
10, 2 '';N\*^ kol to. irpo/SaTO. fxov=^'^m)i). 

Zech. 5, 6 D:^y -fj dSiKia avTU)v=Q^'^V,, etc. 

1 QKA I 

Ixvi Introduction 

MT. 1, LXX > :— 

x}/. 17, II init^N iK/3aX6vT€? /^e=''J ??? (perhaps Aram. ''^l^p^^. 

2 2, 25 ):^J2 OLTT €>Oi; = "'JO». 

30 iTn ab V^SJI Kat 17 if/vxv /J-ov avrw t,yj=i^l^ i^ ''^??V 
41, 9 12 Pl^'' KariOevTO /car' c/>to{}=:''3 ? . 
56, 8 px ?y -iiTTcp Toi) fir;^€vos = pX 7y. 

59, 10 irj? TO KpaTOS yLlOD = "'rj; (cf. Z'. l8). 

62, I pnn^ 'i8i^ow\ 

5 "IDNCJ'O Tr]V TtfJL7]V flOV. 

04) 7 3*lp1 TrpocrcXevo-erat^i^lp^. 

65, 8 D^nx^ pj^ni Tapax6>/o-oi/Tai£^v77=D^ONb )=i»n;: (or r»n^). 

68, 7 nriTl^ IJ^ti' Tovs KaToiKovvTa<s iv Ta^ois= ? V.?'^. 

73, lob {<^0 101 K-at T^^epat 7rXi^/3€is = Nbn ''D'' (/<ai added). 

76, 7 ^1^1 3^*11 DT^J ei/vcTTa^av ot eTrtySeySi^KOTCS tovs iTTTrors = 

DID ''33T iDnn:, 

91, 5 '"""inDI KVKXwcreL o-6 = ']*inD\ 

109, 10 ICJ'-n') £/c/?A176'l7TO)o■av = =l^^'13^ 

28 "IDp 01 €7ravtcrTa/xcvoi /Aot = 'P5. 

I^9> 3 ''l''''y W^ N? P]N ov yap ol epya^o/x.evoi T^v wo/Atav = NP ^jS 

Add Ez. 48, lob nin^ co-rat ^nTi''. 

35 ICti* niiT' €o-Tat TO ovo/xa avTrjs = '\'Ci^ nVT". 
Lam. 3, 22 UDD ab ^2 ovk cfe'AtTroV /x€ = ''3ari nh (GK. § 117^). 
Sometimes both confusions occur in one word or verse : — 
"A- 35> 19 py 1^"lp^ Kal 8iav€uovT€s 6(fi0a\fio:?=VV ^^y]. 

I45> 5 """1211 AaX7jo-oi;o-i = nm\ 
Jer. 6, 23 11"iy 133"!'' D''D1D ?j;l e<^' ittttois Kttt apfxaa-i 7rapaTa^€Tai= 

Tjhy: a^Ti D^DiD ^y2. 

' So in Kt. 39, I. 77, I. Neh. ti, 17. i Ch. 16, 38 : and in LXX of i Ch. 9, 
16 etc., where MT. has regularly pnn\ 

2 Instances such as Sei^ for PjlY ; 'A-yxovs for C^^N ; ^J-. 8 title DTlJn tSj' At/i/cDi/ 
= mnjn ; 27, 6 Dn"" vipaiaf = On^ ; SS, u imp"" D^N31 DN ^ larpoi di/a(rTi7CToi/(7t 
= 1D''p^ D''NQ"I DN (cf. Is. 26, 14) are not cited, as the difference of pronunciation 
presupposed by LXX is due probably, not to confusion of 1 and "•, but to the absence 
of the plena script io. 

That the MS, (or MSS.) upon which the Massoretic text is founded must also at 

§ 4- I- c. Character of Hebrew Text used by the LXX Ixvii 

(/?) MT. 1, LXX l: I 4, lo and 15, 4 ''^31 Tay/Aarwv (as though 
^i?n; see Nu. 2, 2, etc.); 10, 24 lyi'' eyvwo-av; 13, 3 and 14, 21 

nnny 8oi}Xo6; 40 Ms nay SovXetW; 19, 13 "T'^^ ^Trap (133); 23, 15 
riK'ina iv rrj KaLvfj; 24, 3 Luc. niv T779 ^T?/oas IT'S); n 19, 18 nnnyi 

ninyn Kal iXeLTOvpyrja-av rrjv XetTovpyiav ; 22, 21. 25 Luc. "^3^ Sdfav, 
8o$aafxo'S C^l')- 

MT. 1, LXX 1:1 17, 8 Dnny 'E/SpaMi; 19, 22 ^nj aA(o (pa); 
21, 7, etc. Awt)k o lupos ; 23, 14. 19. 24, I nnSO Mao-cpc/A, Meo-crapa, 
evTOts o-revois; 24, 12 mX Sctr/AeiJets (1">X) ; 3©, 8 inj ycSSovp; II 3, 4 
n^3nx, B 'OpveiX, A 'Opvtas, Luc. 'Opvia [so i Ki. i — 2 Luc, through- 
out]; 6, 10-12 (so I Ch. 13, 13. 14a, but not 15, 24. 25, etc.) nay 

mN 'A/JcSSapa (as though n-iN'nny). 

And often in other books. 

(y) MT. 3, LXX D: I[ 5, 20 C^-lS ^yna ck twv eVayo) SiaKOTrwv 
( = Q"'V'iS ^yDD); II, 2 1 f. ym ©a/xao-i; 21, 19 aa'Po/x; and probably 
(though not certainly) in the following places where 3 is rendered 
by ttTTo, €/c: I 4, 3. 25, 14 end. II 2, 31. 5, 24. 6, i. 9, 4^. 16, 13. 

18, 8. 19, 23. 40 Luc. (noy for nny; so 2 Ki. 6, 30). Cf. mi^ax 
'A|U,etva8a/3 \ Notice the resemblance of 3 and 10 in the Kefr-Bir'im 
Inscription (above, p. xxiii, Fig. 12). 

MT. 12, LXX 3: 16, 20 1DV SteXOelv (n3y); 9, 2 p iv; 26 (see 
note); 14, i; II 13, 34^'. 

one time or other have been written in a character in which ^ and 1 were very 
similar, is clear from the frequency with which 1 occurs with ^ """Ip, and ■• with 
1 ">np (Ochlah we-Ochlak, Nos. 8o, 8i, 134-148), the ^np being often, as i Sam. 
22, 17. 25, 3. 2 Sam. 15, 20 (though not always), indisputably correct. 

1 See also Dt. 1, 44 ^''yb'D for -\''yb'3 rightly), xp. 18, 14* («£ as in || 2 Sam. 
both LXX and MT.). 32, 3^ 78,26*. 105, 36*. 119, 84^ 139, 13". Pr. 10, 21 
cm v\prj\a (D''?3~l). 12, 3». 24, 5*. 28, 12. 28 D'lp3 iv Tonois (DIpD : notice 
niDlpm in the Inscr. of Kefr-Bir'im). i Ch. 7, 6 nOT for ^3! Jos. 7, i. Hos. 5, 
13 and 10, 6 3"!"' 'lapei^. 13, 9 ''3 LXX, Pesh. •'D (rightly). Jer. 38, 24^ 46, lo^ 
Ez. 16, 6 «« ToC aiVaros (tou for "]^J0n3. Ob. 21. Hab. 2, 4 tK iricTiws /^ou for 

in3ir:N3. jos. 3, le^^ n3y «tcrT)7«€i (cf. on 11 15, 23). 

2 See also ip. 45, 14^ eu. 68, 23'' (Iv in spite of l« 23"). 36*. 81, 7'' (n3n3yn 1)12 
for nn3yn nniD). 104, 15^. 119, 68'' (n''D?31 read as n^D31) : cf. 70, 4 mt:''' for 
1DCi>^ 40, 16. Pr. 17, IO^ Jer. 21, i IT'C^'yO Baaatov. 46, 25 N3D rof vioc out^s 
(nJ3). Ez.48, 29 nSm3 for n^nSO rightly (see Jos. 13, 16. 23,4; H^mD is un- 
translateable). Jos. 8, 33 ClOy TrapenopfvovTo. Sometimes, as ip. 31, 8''. 135, 21*. 
Jer, 9, 18 (19). 20, 1 7, it may be doubtful whether the variation points to a difference 

f 2 

Ixviii • Introduction 

Other letters confused in LXX may be noted by the reader for 
himself. All cannot be reduced to rule : a certain number are due 
to accidental causes, as the partial illegibility of a letter in particular 
cases \ 

(<r) According to Lagarde^ the three letters n, D, n, when occur- 
ring at the end of a word, were not written in the MSS. used by 
LXX, but represented by the mark of abbreviation (') which already 
appears on Hebrew coins. This is not improbable : though it may 
be doubted if it was in use universally. Certainly there are cases in 
which the difference between LXX and MT. may be readily explained 
by the supposition that a mark of abbreviation has been differently 
resolved (or overlooked) in one of the two texts ^ ; but they are 
hardly numerous or certain enough to establish a rule, the differences 
being frequently capable of explanation in other ways ; for instance, 
from textual imperfection or corruption, or from looseness of rendering 
on the part of the translators. Thus in the 2 pf., MT. has sometimes 
a pi. where LXX express a sing., and vice versa : but it is difficult to 
shew conclusively that such variations can only be explained in this 
manner; 2 sg. pf. masc. has often n- in MT. (as nrinj), and the 
variation may have arisen from confusion between n and D ; or again, 
as the variation often occurs in passages where the number of the 
pron. in the Hebrew changes, it may be due to an assimilating 
tendency on the part of the translators. Change of number is so 
frequent in Hebrew, according as the speaker or writer thinks of 
a group or of an individual belonging to, or representing, a group, 
that the variation may in such cases be original. In the case of 
numbers, as of persons, the temptation to assimilate to the context, 
or to define more closely what the Hebrew left undefined, or to adopt 
a more idiomatic usage in the construction of collective terms, would 

of reading, as the LXX may have rendered loosely : but in most of the instances 
quoted, there seems no reason to suppose this. Cf. J. M. P. Smith, Nahntn (in the 
Intern. Crit. Comm.), 1912, p. 300 f.; and on 3 and O confused, ibid. p. 361 (Index). 

' On graphical errors in MT., comp. (with reserve) Gratz, Die Fsalmen, 
pp. 1 21-144, where they are classified and illustrated. 

2 Anmerkttngen zur griech. Obersetzimg der Proverbien, p. 4. 

^ Consider Lagarde's remarks on Pr. 2, 20*. 3, l8^ 7, I'f. it, 15^ 13, i^. 14, 

Io^ 15,15*. 16, is"*. 16. 31, 23^ 

§ 4- I- c. Character of Hebrew Text used by the LXX Ixix 

often be strong : so that, though there are, no doubt, exceptions, it is 
probable that variations of this kind between MT. and LXX are to 
be attributed, as a rule, to the translators ^. At the same time it may 
well be that abbreviations were in occasional use ^ 

2. The Targum. The text deviates but rarely from MT. Only 
two features need here be noticed : {a) the tendency, in this as in 
other Targums, to soften or remove anthropomorphic expressions 
with reference to God : (b) the tendency to paraphrase. 

{a) I I, 3 to worship and sacrifice be/ore i\iQ Lord of Hosts (so 21) ; 
10 was praying be/ore the Lord (so v. 26); 11 if the affliction of thine 
handmaid is revealed be/ore Thee (Heb. if Thou seesi)^ ; 19 end and 
the memory of her entered in before '' (^ Dip r\T\y\-\ ^yi ; Heb. mST''"! 
'': so V. II. 2, 21); 28 '"h vn^NK'n I have delivered him up that he 
may minister be/ore '^ ; ib. ''h ?1X^ he shall minister be/ore ''* ; 2, 11 
ministered be/ore ''> ; 25^ '» ^sn ''3 for it was pleasure (Niy~l) be/ore '"< 
to slay them; 35 and I will raise up be/ore me; 6, 17 as a guilt 
offering before '%■ 7, 3 and worship before Him alone (so v. 4. 
12, 10^); 17 and built an altar there before '">; 10, 17 gathered before 
'''; II 7, 5 shalt thou build before me a house.? And so frequently. 

mp '{O from before is employed similarly : I i, 5 and children were 
withheld from \\ex from before \ 2ol> iox from before''' have I asked 

1 So, for instance, I Sam. 5, 10^. II ; 29, 3 TlX v/^wv ; 30,22; 2 Sam. 10, 11 ^tj; 
Ex. 14, 25 riDIJK (pvyaijxiv ; Jud. 11, 19 end ; 20, 23. 28 etc. 

* Unless, for instance, the translators found abbreviations in their text, such ren- 
derings as the following are difficult to account for : Jud. 19, 18 niiT' JT'3 HN «« 
rbv oIkuv fiov — Tl''^ PK ; Jer. 6, 11 miT' POn t6v Ovfiov fiov = ^niOn ; 25, 37 
flliT' ^IS Bvnov fxov = ^2X ; and unless they could assume them, as something familiar, 
they would scarcely have been led to adopt these renderings : Jer. 2, 2''-3* ^"inX 
PX"lti'^ Ulp [repeated by error] Xe'^ti Kvpio'?, 6 dyios ^IffparjK (= {J'Tlp '^ "IDX 
^XTt^"') ; 3, 19 ^'K ffvoiTo Kvpie on = 13 mn'' fON ('3 '"• '^ : for '^ivoiro = fDK 
see II, 5) ; Jon. 1, 9 ""^JX ''"131? AoSAoj icvpiov (ifil iyu = ''DJN '' H^S?. Is. 53j 8 
1127 ds Oavarov = niD? ('1D^). The supposed 'apocopated plural' in '' -r- (Ew. 
§ 177*; GK. § 87'') is also best explained as an error due to the neglect of a mark 
of abbreviation : comp. Cheyne, critical note on Is. 5, i ; xp. 45, 9. We. (p. 20) 
points to 14, 33 Dmj3 LXX hv TiOeaiix, as proof that the abbreviation, though it 
might be used in some cases, at any rate was not universal. Comp. further (with 
reserve) Perles, Anakkten zur Textkritik des A.T.s (1895), pp. 4-35. 

' So constantly when DNI is used of God : as 9, 16. Gen. 29, 32. 31, 12. Ex. 3, 
7. 9 etc. 

Ixx Introduction 

him. 3, 8b that it was called to the child from before the Lord '. 
20 the request which was askedyri?/^ before '\ 6, 9 xhtxvfrom before 
him is this great evil done unto us ^. 9, 9 to seek instruction from 
before '"> (Heb. cn^x!? ti^m^). 15 and it was said to Samuel /;-<?/« 
before '"• (so 17). 11, 7 and there fell a terror yrcw before'*' upon the 
people. 15, 10 and the word of prophecy was with Samuel /rcffz 
before '*>, saying (so II 7, 4). 26, 19 '\i from before''' thou art stirred 
up against me, let mine offering be accepted with favour, but if the 
children of men, let them be accursed/ro;« before '\ 

(b) Paraphrastic renderings. These are very numerous, and only 
specimens can be given here : I i, 12^ and Eli waited for her till she 
should cease; 16 Dishonour not thy handmaid before a daughter of 
wickedness ; 2, 11 'hv ''^na in Eli's lifetime (for 'hv ""JSTIN) ; 32* and 
thou shalt observe and shalt behold the affliction that shall come 
upon the men of thy house for the sins which ye have sinned in my 
sanctuary ; and after that I will bring good upon Israel ; 3, 7* and 
Samuel had not yet learnt to know instruction from before '"», and the 
prophecy of '"• was not yet revealed to him; 19 and Samuel grew, 
and the Word (Ninvj) of '^ was his help^; 4, 8 who will deliver us 
from the hand of the ' Memra ' of ''' whose mighty works these are .? 
6, 19 and he slew among the men of B., because they rejoiced that 
they had seen the ark of ''' exposed (i^j na) ; and he killed among the 
elders of the people seventy men, and in the congregation 50,000 ; 7,6 
and poured out their heart in penitence as water before '* ; 9, 5 they 
came into the land wherein was a prophet (for sjIV f "IX : cf. i, i 
N^J "'^"•n^no for D^SIV; see Hab. 2, i Heb.); 9, 12. 14. 25 JT'a 
NnnnDN dining-chamber (for nD^H : NnnnDX = HDC'^n v. 22) ; 10, 5. 
II N''"1SD scribes (for D''X''aJ) ; 15, 29 And if thou sayest, I will turn 
(repent) from my sin, and it shall be forgiven me in order that I and 
my sons may hold the kingdom over Israel for ever, already is it 
decreed upon thee from before the Lord of the victory of Israel, 

^ Such impersonal constructions are common in the Targiims. 

^ On the rp retained mechanically from the Hebrew, in spite of the construction 
being varied, see ikit Journal of Philology, xi. 227 f. 

^ So often when Yahweh is said to be 'with' a person : 10, 7. 16, 18. 18, 14. 
Gen. 39, 2, 3 etc. 

§4- 2. Characteristics of the Targutn of Samuel Ixxi 

before whom is no falsehood, and who turns not from what He has 
said ; for He is not as the sons of men, who say and belie themselves, 
who decree and confirm not ; 25, 29 but may the soul of my lord be 
hidden in the treasury of eternal life (xto^y "'Tl tJn) before '» thy God ; 
28, 19 (on the margin of the Reuchl. Cod.: Lagarde, p. xviii, 1. 10*) 
and to-morrow thou and thy sons shall be with me in the treasury of 
eternal life; 11 6, 19 "iSK^N (see note); 20, 18 and she spake, saying, 

I remember now what is written in the book of the Law to ask peace 
of a city first [Dt. 20, 10] ; so oughtest thou to ask at Abel whether 
they will make peace ; 21, 19 and David the son of Jesse, the weaver 
of the veils of the sanctuary (Heb. n'^JiX ny-p pnkx !), of Bethlehem, 
slew Goliath the Gittite. 

3. The Peshitto. The Hebrew text presupposed by the Peshitto 
deviates less from the Massoretic text than that which underlies the 
LXX, though it does not approach it so closely as that on which the 
Targums are based. It is worth observing that passages not unfre- 
quently occur, in which Pesh. agrees with the text of Ltician, where 
both deviate from the Massoretic text ^ In the translation of the 
Books of Samuel the Jewish element alluded to above (p. Hi) is not 
so strongly marked as in that of the Pent. ; but it is nevertheless 
present, and may be traced in certain characteristic expressions, which 
would hardly be met with beyond the reach of Jewish influence. 
Expressions such as ' to say, speak, worship, pray, sin before God,' 
where the Hebrew has simply to God, are, as we have seen, a dis- 
tinctive feature of the exegesis embodied in the Targums ; and they 
meet us similarly in the Peshitto version of Samuel. Thus I i, 10 
prayed before the Lord (so v. 26. 7, 5. 8. 9. 8, 6. 12, 8. 10. 19. 15, 11. 

II 7, 27). 2, II Ut^a «».i> )oo» jtjaa.A.'^ ministered before the Lord 
(so 3, i). 26 in favour before God. 8, 21 spake them before the 
Lord (Heb. ''JIN3). 10, 17 gathered before the Lord. II 11, 27 end 

1 Comp. Bacher, ZDMG. 1874, p. 23, who also notices the other readings pub- 
lished by Lagarde from the same source, pointing out, where it exists, their agree- 
ment with other Jewish Midrashic authorities. 

''1 12, II. 13,5. 14,49. 15.7- 17.12. 30,15- 1111,4. 15,7. 21,8. 23,17. 
24, 4 : for some other cases, in which the agreement is mostly not in text, but in 
interpretation (as I 4, 15. 10, 2. 17, 18), see Stockmayer, ZAW. 1892, p. 220 ff. 

Ixxii Introduction 

(for "•J''y3). 21, 6. 23, 16 ^«</. 24, 10 and 17 {said before): in all 
these passages, except II 11, 27, Targ. also has Dip. Similarly 
o«js ^ from lefo7-e: I 2, 25 D\n7N 1P72"| he shall ask (forgiveness) 
from before the Lord. 16, 14b (for DND : so Targ.). II 3, 28 (for 
nj?a : so Targ.). 6, 9 (so Targ.), 23, 17 )w4-» «»ia ^ w^ «£&<. 
(so Targ., as also I 24, 7. 26, 11, where, however, Pesh. has simply 
)u.4^ ^-ao). I 2, 17 """^ nmD nx IVNJ is rendered by \^;,>si «.is cji^j/ 
which is a Jewish paraphrase for /o curse or provoke God : see Lev. 
24, II al. Onq. (for ^^jp); i Ki, 22, 54. 2 Ki. 17, 11 Targ. Pesh. 
(for D"'JJ3n : often also besides in Targ. for this word); 2, 22 niX^vn 
.^^» who prayed, Targ. nN?V? fflNT who came to pray (cf. note) ; 
30 ''JS^ pa^nn'' i*^c*i3 ^oawnAj shall Jiwiister before me, Targ. pK^DC''' 
••mp; 17, 49 invo ^N wwojliiw 1^*=> as Targ.; 21, 3 iJnijX ''J^Q aipD 
***.^>3o Uj^? lil/, cf. Targ. (both here and 2 Ki. 6, 8) ''D3 '\T\ih 
TDUI; 27, 7 y^:> ^Ow for D^n"" as Targ.i ; II i, 21 ^■ik:x>\ niDm 
(cf. the renderings of HDlin and Dnn in the Pent., e.g. Ex. 25, 2 
Onq. NniK'lQS ''Onp pC'iQ''"!, Pesh. ).i*.>a3 w^ ^a«,iajo, lit. that 
they separate for me a separation'^'); 6,6 p3J JUiil ppHD ; 14 "13"i3rD 
paraphrased by v«.^iLao praisings as in Targ.; 7, 23 niNIIJ J^joJL*. 
!7?«ww (cf. the rend, of N"i1D, niSilD by f1|n in Dt. 4, 34. 26, 8. 34, 12 
[where Pesh., as here, )oJ— or ijoji-]); 8, 18 □'•jriD ^:>»o^, Targ. 
p2"inn; 24, 15 nyi» ny ny to the sixth hour I 

As a whole the translation, though not a strictly literal one, repre- 
sents fairly the general sense of the original. Disregarding variations 
which depend presumably upon a various reading, the translation 
deviates from MT. {a) by slight and usually unimportant additioiis 

^ So 29, 3. II 13, 23 Pesh. (but not Targ.) ; Gen. 24, 55 Onq. (but not Pesh.) ; 
Nu. 9, 22 Onq. and Pesh. 

* Cf. LXX d(paip(y.a. The explanation underlying these renderings is, in all 
probability, correct : D''"in is to lift off, nD1"in that which is lifted off, or separated, 
from a larger mass for the purpose of being set apart as sacred (cf. p. 236). 

^ ' Syrus in eandem sententiam de verbis TyiQ ny ly abiit, quam de illis 
Rabbini statuerunt, Beracli. 62" IDN yi^O Dy "ND HyiD ny lyi "Ipan?:) 

*iy Tronn nn'n-i' ny:i'D ^<rJ^ '-n n'OK'D xr^n m n'-jnn xno ^^<'1DE^• 
u'Do nii*n ny -idn pnr 'i inpnt rm- chaidaeus ergo (D''3jnoT p'^y P 

pOnOT nyi J^Tf^n) pnmam, Syrus alteram secutus est sententiam ' (Perles, 
p. 16). 

§ 4- 3- Characteristics of the Peshitto of Samuel Ixxiii 

or glosses : {b) by omissions, due often either to ofioioTiKcvTov, or to 
an inability to understand the sense of the Hebrew : (<r) by paraphrases, 
due sometimes likewise to an inability to give a literal rendering, and 
occasionally of a curious character. Specimens of these three classes : 
(a) Additions: I 2, 13 (and they made themselves a prong of three 
teeth) and the right of the priests (they took) from the people; 
35 a priest faithful (after My own heart); 4, 9 end-io and fight (with 
them). And the Philistines fought (with Israel) ; 5, 8 (thrice) + the 
Lord; 7, 14 to Gath and their borders [nx neglected], and (the Lord) 
delivered Israel, etc. ; 8, 6 to judge us (like all the peoples) ; 1 2 + and 
captains of hundreds . . . and captains of tens; 12, 6 the Lord (alone 
is God,) who, etc.; 24 + and with all your soul; 14, 49 + and 
Ashboshul (= Ishbosheth^); 23, 12 ^;/i+ Arise, go out from the 
city; 24, 20 and when a man finds his enemy and sends him [in?CJ'1 
treated as a continuation of the protasis] on a good way, (the Lord 
reward him with good); 30, 15 end + and David sware unto him 
(cf. Luc). II 6, 5 of (cedar and) cypress; 12, 8 and thy master's 
wives (have I let sleep) in thy bosom; 18, 4 deg/nning + And his 
servants said to David, We will go out and hasten to fight with them ; 
8 and (the beasts of) the wood devoured of the people, etc. (so Targ.); 
20 Kt. for (thou wilt announce) respecting the king's son that he is 
dead; 20, 8 end and it came out, and (his hand) fell (upon his sword); 
24, 7 and they came to the land of Judah (in thirty-eight days) [text 
disordered]. There are also many instances of the addition of the 
subj. or obj. of a verb, or of the substitution of a noun for a pron. 
suffix (' Explicita '), of which it is not worth while to give examples. 
In 2 Sam. 22 the text has generally been made to conform with that 
of./.. 18. 

(5) Omissions: I 3, 21 1^::^a ^NIDC'^ -"'• n^J '•31 5, 10 NU:: M^l 

inpy DM^^xn piNl 12, 2 n^nno. 17 '"' ^:^b nn^c^y ic^s*. 13, 4a lyt^tj; 
nnN^. 14, I nvn \ti. 34 on^^Ni. 35^ from bnrt ins. 36* nb'h. 
36b from -i?:xM. 15, 2 1^ n^ nc-'Nl 32 nnyo jjn v^n i^m*. 16, 

1 Pesh. identifies Ishui with Abinadab (see 31, 2). 

2 Probably through ofioioreKevTov. 
^ Probably not understood. 

Ixxiv Introduction 

I5b-l6a IJnX . . . NJ. l6b D\l!?X. 17, II n^NH. 13 yOw^o*:*!*.© 

for nr^n^Dn la^n 'w^ vn r\-^h^ at^i. 14b. 22 ncit:^. 31 nn. 
39 "rT'DJ . . . n»N''i\ 45bic'N'^. 18, 9b nxbni. 23, 11^-12^ nns-i 

^i'lNtJ' , . , . 24, 20I' (abbreviated^). 25, 30 nm "It^'S ^3D^ 33 end^ 
[cf. the paraphr. in 26]. II i, 21 ''^3. 8, 14 DHSn and D''2\*3 Dt^'. 
13, 12b 18 (the whole verse'). 15, 18 :i'"'N mXD t^'iJ'. 20 f?;^/ i*2iA. 

for n»xi non 7:y I 24 p-ix nxipv^ qih^nh nnn^ 27 nnxn^nn^ 

18, 2^-3^ (>3 NVn xi? XVX N!**^) '. 3 n^ 13^^N .... inO> DNI 

••a'. 2ib, 26a (first five words). 19, 18 (first four words). 21. 6 
■'"'' Tn2. 24, 6a (6b follows at the end of r,'. 7). 23 ^^on. 

(c) Paraphrases (including some due to a mistranslation or to a 
faulty text): I 2, 17 (see p. Ixxii). 22 pat^i ^i>>._'». 24 Dnnyo 
^A^\^20o. 25. 29 \\'^ from the wilderness. 30 '•JD^ JiaSin'' should 
minister before me. 32 jiyo n^ nD3ni (31 there shall not be an old 
man in thy house) or one holding a sceptre in thy dwelling. 3, 13 
VJ3 Dni? hhh^'O '•3 )L'<i.i>>X «otau> ^^o. 0001 ^*i_V_50?. 4, 2 C'Om 
Jooo. 6, 6b and how they mocked them, and did not send them 
away. 10, 22 5y^N D^n liy N3n where is this man? 12, 3^ ijjn 
behold, I stand before you. 3b q-^ ©»=> .^juji^ l?.o 12 '•J'-y Ci''^yN1 
k*lii.. 6. 13, 4 C'N'iJ ^itt.A.. 6 nyn b'j: '3 1!^ "IV ""^ simply a^^«?o 
and they feared. 7 ^«^ innx mn simply o^jsci:^. 12 Tl^^n N^ 
fc«~.)-. )). 14, 7b ']33^3 ^:x:^ yr^\a? ^^. 24* And Saul drew near 
in that day, and said to the people, Cursed, etc. 25* And they went 
into all the land, and entered into the woods. 16, 4 mn"'') ciiaajo. 
6 in"'K'D i"^ 133 IS o»«w^iD )^iJ«? otloo/. 19 end jXVa "Itt'X o.^ «»*-. 
20 Dni? (and laded it with) bread. 17, i8b w.^ %^] yOoUixrco (cf. 
Targ. TlTl pHTt: n''1, and the doublet in Luc. koi da-oia-€L<: jxol ttjv 
dyyeAtW aiiTwv). 39 Dj? ?X"'1 and would not go. 52 "lyn'^l aaa^ljo. 
18, 22 nCN^ D^n u^*/ i.2. the son of Jesse(!). 20, 12 rr^'J^^t^'n , 
^aJSI^a. iO:i.l^i^ at the third hour : so 19 iox T\^hm. 26 XIH "IIHD 'n^n 
HHD N? ""^ perhaps he is clean, or perhaps he is not clean. 21, 6 
^ oo» ^^A-"« Ua»CLD (as though lib ni^'y nC'N!): see also 21, 14. 
16. 22, 19 (2J nxi o»^ oomo — the two words read as one and 

^ Probably through dfioioTt\(VTOv. * Or perhaps transposed. 

^ Probably not understood. 

§4- 3- Characteristics of the Peshitto of Samuel Ixxv 

connected with |nj). 23, 22*. 25, 8. 17b 26. 27, 8. 30, 6 (mD 
read as nno). 14^. II 2, 13 ()ociX^-V. thrice for nain). 24 (nj2S* 

\:Ll). 27. 29 (fnnan-b ia*^ )^)l). 3, 34. 39a {r\\^\y\ in "^-t 

fcs-,Uo \il\ 4, 6 (D''Dn connected with DVSUn). 5, 8 (TIJV3 Uacas.). 
6, 16 (-on3D1 nao U.t>.A:»o )^?). 21b. 7, 23^. 8, 13*. n, 25 
(3"inn ?;DS'n it happens in war!). 12, 25 f;/</. 13, 4*. 26. 32 (^2 ?y 
o*XA.Vi2> in his mind). 14, 7. 17 (nn3?p). 20* (/// 7nihi \^\%\ morem 
gereres : PS, col. 279). 24. 30. 32^. 15, 19. 32. 34. 16, i. 2 

(no JoL^a-/ ^). 4 (>n''inntj'n .^^^ k^..(' ^*.«^). 8^ 21^ 17, 10 

(JijQj!oliN-» JJ ci--oftj«]^.» will not melt). 16^. 20 (see note). 18, 5*^ 
(take me the young man Absalom alive). 18. 29. 33 [19, i Heb.] 
(in333 for inn^a). 19, 9^(10^), 17 (Heb. 18: in^^l they Jiave crossed 
and bridged Jordan). 31 (32) end. 35 (36 )l»)k**o li'Ju*, i.e. D''"lb' 
nnbl!). 20, 8 (nnynn ^.=1^^ ^/)- iS^. 19a, 21, 2^ (in his zeal to 
cause Vhe Israelites to sin). 5. 23, i (Saith the man who set up the yo/ie 
[^j? Dpn] of his Messiah !\ 8. 11 (niH Jiaiiw^ »a^ ^-» of the mountain 
of the liing: so 25 for mnn). 19. 22. 23 ('inynK'D ^X to go out and 

to come in). 33" (mnn \)^'l) »q^ ^;-"»?)- 24, 13^ 16. 25 (nnyi 
pN^ *"•• Jl^kj/ %jiw \*iia .*^i»^l|o : not so elsewhere). 

The Syriac text of Pesh. sometimes (as might indeed be anticipated 
from the nature of the character) exhibits corruptions, similar to those 
noticed in the case of LXX, p. Ivii f. Thus I i, 21 CA^s^^sa^ for 
^ J, ,-> , >f^\ (so rightly the Cod. Ambr. published in facsimile by 
Ceriani' : also the Arab, version in the Polyglotts^ 'to offer'). 2, 8 
Ui.** ^^s^;^ for )u;jic.)i^ ^^^-^ (-"^ ^^ the beginning has fallen out). 
3, 14 o . . , Is*:*/" for ? . . , fc^-cS/ (Heb. ^nync^'J). 19 v>^**o for ^uo 
(Heb. hj^l). 9, 4 JwccL^? for IwAi^J (Heb. r\fih^^). 12, 21 h 
^olajcl probably for ^»la^ h (Heb. I^^yi^ N^ IK'S: notice the 

i Comill, Ezechid, p. 144 f., exaggerates the extent to which this MS. may have 
been corrected after MT. : its approximations to MT. (p. 140 ff.) are slight, com- 
pared with the cases in which it agrees with other MSS. against it (p. 148 ff.). 
Comp. Rahlfs, ZATW. 1889, pp. 180-192. 

2 "Which, in the Books of Samuel, and in certain parts of Kings, is based upon 
the Pesh. : see Roediger, De orig. et indole Arab. libr. V. T. hist, interpr. (1829). 

3 So Tiich on Gen. 10, 6, and PS. coll. 681-2, 741. Comp. 2 Ki. 4, 42 Pesh, 
{rwh"^ connected similarly with t^'bE', Ll'C"^*kr, commonly represented in Pesh. 

Ixxvi Introduction 

following ptcp. for "li?''^'' vhS). 17, 20 U«iX for )L-^ (so Cod. 
Ambr.). 40 )Li ^v> for JLJ ^ (Heb. ^mn-p). 28, 6 rf-I.'aia 
for rtf-xnirs (so Arab, 'prophets'). II 12, S^" l^Jis prob. for l^*i>, 
though possibly a paraphrase. 18, 17 i^a^ prob. for ^ioL^ (Heb. 
lya). (Several of these instances are noted by Well., p. 8.) The 
name 2"1D is represented regularly by o»j. 
4. The Latin Versions. 

{a) The affinity subsisting between the Old Latin Version and 
the recension of Lucian appears to have been first distinctly per- 
ceived (with reference in particular to the Lamentations) by Ceriani ^ 
Afterwards, it was noticed, and frequently remarked on, by Vercellone, 
as characteristic of the excerpts of the Old Latin Version on the 
margin of the Leon Manuscript (above, p. Hi), that, when they 
diverged from the ordmary Septuagintal text, they constantly agreed 
with Holmes' four MSS. 19, 82, 93, 108, which, as was clear, 
represented on their part one and the same recension ^ A version 
identical with that represented in the excerpts was also, as Vercellone 
further pointed out, cited by Ambrose and Claudius of Turin ^ The 
conclusion which the facts observed authorize is thus that the Old 
Latin is a version made, or revised, on the basis of MSS. agreeing 
closely with those which were followed by Lucian in framing his 
recension ''. The Old Latin must date from the second cent. a. d. ; 
hence it cannot be based upon the recension of Lucian as such : its 
peculiar interest lies in the fact that it affords independent evidence 
of the existence of MSS. containing Lucian's characteristic readings 
(or renderings), considerably before the time of Lucian himself ^ 

The following comparison of passages from the Old Latin Version 
of I and 2 Sam., derived from one of the sources indicated above 
(p. lii f.), and all presupposing a text differing from that of the 

1 Monumenta Sacra et Profana, I. i (1861), p. xvi {Addenda). 

"^ Variae Leciiones, ii. 436 (and in other passages). 

s lb. p. 455 f. (on 3 Reg. 2, 5). 

* Comp. Ceriani, Le recensioni dei LXX, etc., p. 5. 

5 Rahlfs (iii. 159 f.) agrees with Ceriani and S. Berger {Hist, de la Vtilg., p. 6) 
in questioning this conclusion (cf. Moore, AJSL. xxix. 60), on the ground that there 
is no sufficient evidence for the early date assigned to the Leon fragments by Vercel- 
lone : he thinks rather that the resemblances shew them to be later than Lucian. 

§4- 4- Characteristics of the Old Latin Version Ixxvii 

normal LXX, but agreeing with that of Lucian, will shew the justice 
of this conclusion. Although, however, the text upon which the Old 
Latin is based agrees largely with that of Lucian, it must not be 
supposed to be identical with it : there are passages in which it agrees 
with B or A, or with other MSS., against Lucian ^ Sometimes 
moreover, it is to be observed, other particular MSS. agree with the 
Old Latin, as well as those which exhibit Lucian's recension. A more 
detailed inquiry into the sources of the Old Latin Version of the 
OT. must be reserved for future investigators. (The list is not an 
exhaustive one. The words printed in heavy type are those in which 
Lucian's text differs from B. In the passages marked f, the deviation 
is confined to the MSS. which exhibit Lucian's recension, and is not 
quoted — at least by Holmes and Parsons — for other MSS. The 
quotations will also illustrate the variations prevailing between different 
recensions of the Old Latin.) 

I I, 6 Goth, quia ad nihilum reputabat Luc. 5id to €|o\j9£V€lv aviTT|v (for 

55, 158 ; and 
44. 74. 106, 

HDynn -luyn;.. So 

similarly {l^ovQivovaa) 
120, 134. 

^ I 4, 12 Vind.' Et cucurrit. BA koX (Spafiti/ (Luc. ical f(pvyev). 

16 Vind.* Qui venit homo pro- B Kal 6 dffjp antvaas irpocrfjXOfv (Luc. 

Koi dirfKpiOrj 6 dvrip 6 kXrjXvOujs) . 

BA (5oii tnT6\tpLfj.a (Luc. f^aprvpiov^. 

kv 'St]\cu tv BaicaXaO XI, 44, 64, 74, 
106, 120, 129, 134, 144, 236; (V 27- 
\aifi if Bai{a\a9 244; (f 'S.rjXojfi BaKaXa 
29 ; ia-q\cij kv BaKa\aO 242 ; kv 2j;Acu 
kv BaKaWaO 55. — dWofievovs fteyd\a 
BA ; Luc. nfcrrj^Ppias d\K. fieyd\a. 
10, 17 Vind.^ Et praecepit . . . con- BA KalTtaprjyyeiKfv (Luc. Kai aw-qyayi). 

B irpoartOriafaOi (Luc. diroXfiaOe). 

A aai dvt^orjafv (B Luc. Kal dvifirj). 

kv ^((pfpfj-e I2T {^a<p(ppLai[i 29, 1 1 9, 
143; '2.«pipixa(in 52, 92, 144, 236; 
^((pepixaifi 55, 64; '2,a<pappLiLV 245!. 

B kv Tw Spvfjxv 'Eippatfi (Luc. kv rai Sp. 
9 Vind.^ Et occurrit Absalom. BAi{alawTjvTr](TtvA.(Lnc.KaL^vfifyaiA.). 

Nor does the Old Latin express Lucian's doublets in I 2, 11. 6, 12, 10, 2 {iiearjp.- 
Bpias). 27'', 15, 29. 32. Sometimes, however, his doublets do occur in it, as I i, 
6 G. 16 G. (not V.^). 4, 18 G. 6, 7 G. (not V.»). 16, 14 G. 27, 8 G. 


9, 24 Vind.2 Ecce reliquum. 

10, 2 Goth, et in Selom, in Bacal- 

lat salientes magnas fossas. 
Vind.-reluctantes hie et salientes 

12, 25 Goth, apponemini in plaga. 

14, 20 Vind.* Et exclamavit. 

17, I O'^DT DDK Goth. Sepherme. 

II 18, 6 Vind.^ in silvam Efre. 



I 2, lo Vind.'^ + quia iustus est. 

15 Vind.^ + ante Dominum. 

3, 14 Sab. et nunc sic iuravi. 
Vind.2 et ideo sic iuravi. 

6, 1 2 Vind.2 in viam . . . rectam. 

9, 27 Vind.^ in loco summo civitatis. 

10, 3 Goth, usque ad arborem glan- 
dis electae. 

Vind.^ ad arborem Thabor alectae 

(i. e. electae). 
12, 3 Goth, aut calceamentum, et ab- 

scondam oculos meos in quo dici- 

tis adversum me, et reddam vobis. 
Sab. vel calceamentum, dicite ad- 

versus me, et reddam vobis. 
14, 14 Goth, in bolidis et petrobolis 

et in saxis campi. 
Vind.'^ in sagittis et in fundibolis et 

in muculis campi. 

14, 15 Goth, et ipsi nolebant esse in 

15, II Sab. Quedl. verba mea non 

17, 39 Goth, et claudicare coepit am- 
bulans sub armis. 

18, 21 Goth, in virtute eris mihi ge- 
ner hodie. 

20, 30 Goth. Filius puellarum va- 
gantium, quae se passim coinqui- 
nant esca mulierum. 

27, 8 Goth. Et apponebant se super 
omnem appropinquantem, et ex- 
? tendebant se super Gesur. 

30, 15 etid (in the current Vulg.) et 
iuravit ei David. 

Luc. SiKaios ujv. So other MSS., among 

them 44, 56, 71, 74, 120, 134, 144, 

158, 246. 
Luc. tvcoTTiov Kvpiov. So other MSS., 

among them 44, 55, 71, 74, 120, 134, 

No Greek MS. is cited with the reading 

thej-efore for pb, all having ouS' (or 

ovx) ovTws (see note). 
Luc. iv TpiPai €vi9eia't'. 
Luc. els aKpov ttjs 7roAe<u?"f". 
Luc. (ws rrjs 5pvds ttjs tKXeKTTJs *. 
246 ((US TTJs Spvos Ba^aip rfjs fKKfKTrjs. 

Luc. ^ vnoSrifia, Kai diT€Kpv)vl/a tovs 

6(j)0a\p,ovis \t.ov €V avra ; e'lnaTf kclt' 

ep.ov, Koi dnoSwaw vpTv •}•. 
So also (with Kapot for Kar' ifiov) 

Theodoret., Quaest. 16 in i Reg. 
Luc. \v ISoXhi Kai tv ireTpopoXois Hal 

iv /co'x^af' Tov mStov. 

Luc. Kai avToi, koI ovk fjOiKov irovuv 

{■noviiv also in X, 56, 64, 71, 119, 244, 

245 : others have voXffxeiv). 
Luc. oiiK to-TTjo-e tovs A070VS (lov. So 

A, I23^ 
Luc. Kai cxf^^ai-ve AaviS kv tw PaSi((tv 

(V avTOis (158 dffxoAace). 
Luc. ev rais SvvdjieerLV emyapPpevcrus 

fxoi (TTjfXfpov (so 44, 74, 106, 120, 134). 
Luc. vi€ Kopaalojy avTo/xoKowToiv Ywai- 

KOTpacJjfj {yw, added also in 29, 55, 

7r, 121 marg., 243, 246). 
Luc. Kai (ireTiOeuTo iiri iravTa tov tyyi- 

Jovra, Kai t^treivov ewl tov T((T- 

aovpaiov. So, except for the difference 

of one or two letters, 56, 158, 246. 
Luc. Kai u^ocrcv ainCo (12 1 marg. Kai w. 

avTw AaviS. So Pesh.). 

* ISn being connected with ")"13 io choose out : see II 22, 27. 

'' In 9, 4 (per terram Sagalim et non invenerunt) Quedl. agrees also with 123, 
not with Lucian (who has tici t^s 7^$ FaSSi ttjs iroXews ^fyaXtip. : cf. 56 FaSSi 
T^s voKiois alone). 

§4- 4- Characteristics of the Old Latin Version Ixxix 

II I, 19 Goth. Cura te (al. curare), Is- 
rael, de interfectis tuis. 
Sab. Considera, Israel, pro his qui 
mortui sunt. 
2, 8 Goth. Isbalem. 
2, 29 Magd. in castra Madiam *. 

6, 12 Sab. Dixitque David, Ibo et 
reducam arcam cum benedictione 
in domum meam, 

7, 8 Goth. Accepi te de casa pas- 
torali ex uno grege. 

9, 6 Goth. Memphibaal. 

10, 19 Vind.^»2 omnes reges qui con- 
venerunt ad [Vind.^ cum] Adrazar 
. . . et disposuerunt testamentum 
coram [Vind.^ cum] Israel, et ser- 
vierunt Israhel [Vind.^ Israeli tri- 

11, 4 Goth, et haec erat dimissa" 
\Alias et haec erat abluta] excelso 

Vind.2« haec autem lota erat post 

11.12 Viad.2^ redi hie. 

11.13 Vind.'i ^ inebriatus est. 
ii,i6Vind.^^ in locum pessimum 

ubi sciebat etc. 
II, 17 Vind.^ et caecidit Joab de po- 

pulo secundum praeceptum Davit. 
II, 24 Goth, de servis regis quasi 

viri XVIII. 
13, 21 Vind.2 et deficit animo valde ''. 

13, 32 Vind.^ in ira enim est ad 
[? eum] Abessalon. 

14, 26 Goth. Vind.^ centum. 

Luc. 'AKpi|3acrai, 'laparjK, inrip kt\. 
(106 cLKpl^coaai aTri\ojaai)\. So Theo- 
doret., Quaest. in 2 Reg. 

Cod. 93 (but not 19, 82) Elo-paaX. 
Luc. eJy TTapeiJ,l3oXa.s MaSia|ji. So 158. 
Luc. Kal eiire AaviS 'EincrTp€v|;o) tt|v 
iiiXoyiav €is tov oikov jjiov. So 158. 

Luc. (K TTJs fxavdpas «£ Ivos twv ttoijji- 

vCtov "t*. 
Luc. MffKpLpoLaX f. 
Luc. navTes 01 ^aaiXeis ol crvjjiiTop«v6- 

[jievoi [so 158] T^ 'ASpaa^ap . . . Kal 

SitGevTO 8ia9T|KT)v fxerci. 'IcrpariK Kal 

f5ov\(vov Tu 'IcrpaT]X '' ■|'. 

Luc. Kal avTT] tJv XeXovjAevt) t^ d<|)€8pov 
avT^T. So the Ethiopic Version "^ and 

Not cited from any 

Le. DB' for 2^^. 

Greek MS. 
Luc. (fie9v(Tdt]j'. 
Luc. enl tov tottov tov irovoOvra ^ [ov 

pSei] KTK.f 
Luc. Kal erreaov tK tov \aov Kara tov 

Xo^ov AaviS, 
Luc. dno rwv SovA.cdi' tov BaaiXius oxrti 

avSp«s 8fKa Kal oktio. So 158. 
Luc. Kal 7)6vixrj(Tf ffcpoSpa f. 
Luc. oTi «v opYfi yv a\)Ta ABecraKai/if, 

Luc. iKaTovf. 

"■ But in V. 31 Magd. has ab illo = Trap' avTov, against Luc. 
•> Kal Si(9. 8ta9. added to r]vTofi6Kr](jav on the marg. of B. by an ancient hand. 
" Based evidently on \e\vfifvr] for \e\ovpi(vt]. BA ayia^ofifyt]. 
^ Which is based on the LXX ; see p. 1, n. 3. 
" There are lacunae in these passages in Vind.^ 
* Unless indeed redi be an error for sede : cf. sedit in clause 6. 
s ' Verba tov irovovvTa eleganter vertunt Hebraeum J?T| "IB'K [pro JJl^ Iti'X] ' 
(Dr. Field). 
^ Goth, ei iratus foetus est agrees here with B koa idvfx^&j]. 



II 15, 23 Goth, et omnis terra bene- 

dicentes voce magna \Jacuna] per 

viam olivae, quae erat in deserto. 
17, 8 Goth, sicut ursus qui a bove 

\_Altas ab aestu : /. ab oestro] 

stimulatnr in campo. 
17, 13 Goth, ut non inveniatur ibi 

Vind.''^ ut non inveniatur tumulus 

fundament i. 
17, 20 Vind.2 festinanter transierunt 

prendere aquam ; (et inquisierunt) 

17, 22 Sab. . . . et antequam denu- 

daretur verbum . . . 

17, 29 Goth, et lactantes vitulos. 

Vind.^ et vitulos saginatos. 

18, 2 Vind.^ Et tripartitum fecit 
Davit populum. 

18, 3 Vind,2 non stabit in nobis cor 

20, 8 Goth, gladium rudentem (/. 

bidentem, We.). 
20, 23 Goth. Et Baneas filius Joab 

desuper lateris et in ponentibus 
- (/, potentibus). 

23, 4 Goth, et non tenebrescet a lu- 
mine quasi pluvia, quasi herba de 
terra *. 

23, 6 Goth, quoniam omnes qui ori- 
untur sicut spinae, et reliqui quasi 
quod emuiigit de lucema. 

23, 8 Goth. lesbael filius Thegemani 
. . . hie adomavit adomationem 
suam super nongentos vulneratos 
in semel. 

Luc. KOI -naaa fj yTJ euXoYOtivTes (poovfj 
fieydXri Kal KXaiovres . . . xarA rrjv 
oSuv Tfjs tXaias ttjs tv ttj iprji^wf. 

Luc. wffirep dpKot irapoiaTpuio-ai €V to) 
TreSiqj "j". 

Luc. OTTO)? [iif etppeOfj €K€i crti(rTpo<|)Ti •^. 

Luc. AieX-riXvOacrt o-rrevSovTes' Kal e^r)- 


Luc. etos Tov \x.-r\ d'7TOKa\v<j>9f)vat toy 

Xoyov, otJTCos Scf^rjcrav tov 'lopSavrjv\'. 
Luc. Kal YttXaO-qvd \i.oa-\apia. So 158. 

Luc. Kal iTpia-crevcTe AaviS tov \a6v\'. 

Luc. ov <rTTicr€Tai tv fi(xiv KapSia •f'. 

Luc. fiaxatpav dp,4>T]KT]. 158 no-x- 8i5- 

OTOIXOV (/. SldTOfXOv) a.lJ.(prjKT]. 

Luc. Kal Bavaias vlus 'laiaSSai (irl tov 
irXivOiou Kal em tovs Swdo-ras "f". So 
(except SvvaToiis) Theodoret., Quaest. 
40 in 2 J?eg. 

Luc. Kal oi aKordcrci. [so other MSS., 
among them 44, 56, 158, 246] dirb 
(peyyovs ws vieros, us PoravT] (k yrjs. 

Luc. oTt irdvTes pi dvaTsXXovTSS wcrmp 
OLKavOa, Kal 01 Xoi-irol u>s aizo^vy^a. 
Xtixvov irdyres't". 

Luc. 'IscrPaaX vtos 0€K€ji,av«i . . . oSros 
8i£K6crp.Ei T^r 8iacrK€UT|v aLTTuiv lirl 
kvvaKoaiovs TpavfiaTias ei'y aTra^f. 

(d) On the general characteristics of Jerome's Version of the OT,, 
reference must be made to the monograph of Nowack, referred to 
above (p. Hii). A synopsis of the principal deviations from the 
Massoretic text presupposed by it in the Books of Samuel, is given 

* But 23, 3 agrees partly with BA : In me locutus est custos Ismol paraholam 
Die hominibus. 

§ 4- 4- Characteristics of the Old Latin Version Ixxxi 

tb. pp. 25-27, 35, 37, 38, 50; the most important are also noticed, 
at their proper place, in the notes in the present volume ^. 

The following instances (which could easily be added to) will 
exemplify the dependence of Jerome in exegesis upon his Greek 
predecessors, especially Symmachus : — 

I I, 18 my rh vn n^ % {oi) hurpdir-q {In), Vulg. non sunt 
amplius in diversa mutati. 
2, 5 "iHn 5. di/evSccts lyivovTo, V. saturati sunt. 

5, 6 Dv2y3 2- Kara twv KpvTTTwv'^, V. in secretiori parte. 

6, 18 ''nan 123 lyi %. Iws Ktofjirj? drctxtcTov, V. usque ad villam 

quae erat absque muro ^. 
9, 24 lyio? X eTTtTT/Scs, V. de industria. 
12, 3 "•n1^{"l "AAAos" £(n;Ko<^dvTr;cra, V. calumniatus sum *. 

22 1"^ P^Nin 13 V. quia iuravit ° Dominus. 
14, 48 (/Ti) K'yi "AAAos* a-va-Trjcrdfjicvos, V. congregato (exercitu). 
20, 41 ^njn nn ny 2. Aai^tS 8e vTrepifiaXXo', V. David autem 

22, 6 7B>Nn A, Tov SevS/jwva, % to ^vtov, V. (in) nemore. Simi- 
larly 31, 13. 

^ The current (Clementine) text contains many passages which are no genuine 
part of Jerome's translation, but are glosses derived from the Old Latin (marked *), 
or other sources. The following list of such passages (taken from Vercellone, 
Variae Lectiones, ii. pp. ix-xiii) is given for the convenience of students: — 

I 4, I io pugitam*; 5, 6 from et ebullienmt* ; 9 from inierunt*; 8, 18 from quia*: 
9, 25 from stravit-\; 10, 1 from et liberabis*; 11, i to mensem*; 13, 15 et reliqui . . . 
Benjamin*; 14, 22 from Et erant*; 41 Domine Deus Israel and quid est . . . sancti- 
tatem*; 15, 3 et non . . . aliqtiid*; I2''-13* Saul offerebat . . . ad Saul*; 32 et 
tremens*; 17, 36 Nunc* . . . incircumcisus ; 19, 21 from Et iratus*; 20, 15 from 
auferat*; 21, 11 cum vidissent David (*ex ignoto fonte'); 23, 13-14 et salvatus 
. . . opaco ; 30, 15 f/ iuravit ei David* ; II i, 18 from et ait, Considera*; 26 from 
Sicut mater ; 4, 5 from Et ostiaria ; 5, 23 i"? . . . meas ; 6, 6 et declinaverunt 
earn ; 6, 12 from et erant ; 10, 19 expaverunt . . . Israel. Et ; 13, 21 from et 
noluit*; 27 from Fecerat*; 14, 30 from Et venientes ; 15, 18 pugnatores validi ; 
20 (j^ Dominus . . . veritatetn ; 21,18 de genere gigantum. 

^ Comp. Mic. 4, 8 pS'y 2. a,n6Kpv(pos. 

' Comp. Dt. 3, 5. 

* Comp. Amos 4, r calumniam facitis. 

* See Ex. 2, 21 PNVI 2. wpiciae di, V. iuravit ergo, which shews the source of 
iuravit here. 

1365 g 

Ixxxii Introduction 

I 23, 13 12Pnn'' "ItJ'Na dSiD^I 2. KaX ippejx/BovTO OTTOvSrJTTOTC^. 

26 Dnoy Oi XoLTTOL' TTcptoTTc^avovvTcs, V. ill modum coronae 

2 5i 3 DvPyo yi 2- KaKoyvdifiwv, V. (pessimus et) malitiosus. 

7 D13D?3n N7 X {ovk) ivwxXrja-afjisv (awovs), V. numquam eis 

molesti fuimus. 
18 C^plOV %. cvSecr/Aous o-ra^tSos, V, ligaturas uvae passae. 

So 30, 12. 
29 nillif 2. TTCf^vXayixivy], V. CUStodita. 
31 np"iQ7 A. 2- (eis) Avy/Aw, V. in singultum. 
33 yc'ini 2. iKSiKyja-ai, V. et ulciscerer (me manu mea). 

26, 5 73yDl 2. (ev TTj) o-KTjvrj, V. in tentorio. 

27, I nnN DV HQDN 2- TrapaTreaovfiai ttotc, V. Aliquando inci- 

dam una die. 
30, 16 C'K'tJJ 2. dvaTTCTTTajKOTcs, V. discumbebant. 

II 2, 16 W^I'Hn np7n A. 2. kA^pos twv o-TcpeGv, V. ager robus- 

8, 2 nrao ""NB^J 2. vTTo <f>6pov, V. sub tribute. 
10, 6 *Tn3 Iti'Nnj 2. iKaKovpyrjaav Trpos AauiS, V. quod iniuriam 

fecissent David. 
12, 14 nifSJ J*N3 2- fiXa(T(t>r]firj(rai liroirjo-aii (the Other versions 

all differently), V. blasphemare fecisti. 
15, 28 T\'0T\t2T\'0 2. Kpv/irjcroixaL, V. abscondar. 
18, 23 *133n ']'in 01 T\ {Kara rrjv 68ov) t^v Siare/ivouo-av, V. per 

viam compendii. 

Three examples, shevt^ing how Jerome followed Aq. or Symm. in 
dividing artificially a Hebrew word (p. xl n. 2), may be added — the last 
being of peculiar interest, as it explains a familiar rendering of the 
Authorized Version : — 

i}/. 16, I 1)1? Dn3D A. ToJ5 Ta7reLv6<f)povo<: kol dirXov tov AautS, Jer.* 
humilis et simplicis David. 

* * Symmachnm ante oculos habuit Hieronymus eleganter vertens : hue atque illuc 
vagabantur incertV (Field). 

2 Jerome's own translation of the Psalter failed to supersede the older Latin 
Version that was in general use ; hence it never made its way into the ' Vnlgate,' 

§4- 4- Characteristics of the Vulgate Ixxxiii 

Ex. 32, 25 nvrDB'i' A. ets ovofxa pvirov (HKV Uih), Jer. propter igno- 

miniam sordis. 
Lev. 16, 8 ?TNTy? 2. €is Tpdyov aTrep^oixevov (v. lO d^tc/tevov), A. ci? 

Tpdyov aTToXvofJLevov (or dTroXeAvyLteVov) i.e. ''il^ TJ/r', Jer. 

capro emissario. Hence the 'Great Bible' (1539- 

1541) and AV. scape-goat'^. 

and must be songht elsewhere {Opera, ed. Bened. I. 835 ff. ; Vallarsi, IX. Ii53ff. ; 
Migne, IX. iizsff. ; Lagarde's Psalterium Hieronymi, 1874 [now out of print]; 
or Tischendorf, Baer, and Franz Delitzsch, Liber Psalmorum Hebraicus atque 
Latinus ab Hieronymo ex Hebraeo cottversus, 1874). The translation of the 
Psalter contained in the ' Vulgate ' is merely the Old Latin Version, revised by 
Jerome with the aid of the LXX. 

* Comp. Is. 66, 24 y^^. ^3^ |"1S11^ usque ad satietatem videndi (as though 
PNI n|)) omni cami. The same interpretation in the Targ. : « And the wicked 
shall be' judged in Gehinnom until the righteous shall say concerning them HCD 
NJ''Tn We have seen enough' The renderings of Aq. Symm, are not here pre- 
served ; but from their known dependence on Jewish exegesis, there is little doubt 
that Jerome's rendering is derived from one of them. 



The Inscription of Mesha\ commonly known as the ' Moahite Stone.' 

The Inscription of Mesha' (which has been several times referred 
to in the preceding pages) is of such importance as an authentic and 
original monument of the ninth century b. c, remarkably illustrating 
the Old Testament, that I have inserted here a transcription and 
translation of it, accompanied by a brief commentary. I have con- 
fined myself to the minimum of necessary explanation, and have 
purposely avoided entering upon a discussion of controverted readings 
or interpretations. The doubtful passages are, fortunately, few in 
number, being limited chiefly to certain letters at the extreme left 
of some of the lines, and to two or three aTraf elprj/xeva, and do 
not interfere with the interpretation of the Inscription as a whole. 
Palaeographical details must be learnt from the monograph of Smend 
and Socin, referred to on p. iv, and from Clermont-Ganneau's 
'Examen Critique du Texte,' in the Journ. As., Janv. 1887, pp. 72- 
112 ^ The deviations from the text of Smend and Socin, adopted 
in the first edition of the present work, were introduced partly on 
the authority of Clermont-Ganneau, partly on that of E. Renan in 
the Journal des Savans, 1887, pp. 158-164, and of Th. Noldeke 
in the Lit. Ceniralblatt, Jan. 8, 1887, coll. 59-61 : in the present 
edition, a few changes in the uncertain places have been made in 
consequence of the re-examination of the stone and squeeze by 
Nordlander {Die Inschrift des Konigs Mesa von Moab, 1896), and 
Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, i (1902), p. i flf.'' Of the older literature 
connected with the Inscription, the most important is the monograph 
of Noldeke, Die Inschrift des Konigs Mesa von Moah (Kiel, 1870), 
to which in parts of my explanatory notes I am indebted. It ought 

* See also the Revue Critique, 1875, No. 37, pp. 166-174 (by the same writer). 
' See also the transcription, with notes, in his Alisemitische Texte, Heft i (1907), 
p. Iff. 

The Inscription of MeshcC Ixxxv 

only to be observed that at the time when this monograph was 
published, some of the readings had not been ascertained so accurately 
as was afterwards done. On the interpretation of the Inscription, 
see also now Cooke, NSI. p. 4 ff. ; and comp. the present writer's 
article Mesha in EB. iii. The line above a letter indicates that the 
reading is not quite certain. 

nn . 3ND . n^n . ? ? trroa . p . wo , i:ii i 

3!?» . 13X1 . nc^ . pb^ , nxD . bv . "i^o . ''2i< 1 "•Ji'- 2 

[^ . nrD]3 I m-^p^ , cTDai? . nxr . nmn . j^yxi 1 nx . nnN . Ti 3 
-ioy I "i^:^ . ^33 , '•J Kin . "di . pbm , bio . '<:v^n ,''2,v^ 4 
-1K3 . trD3 . 5i:x^ , ^3 . |3-i . p' . 3ND . ns . i:yn . bar^' . i^d , '■ 5 
5 . ION . ''iDU I 3N0 . nx . i:yN . nh . dj . idn'I . n:3 . ns^n^ 1 ns 6 
[in] nx . noy , b'-i^i . D!?y . n3s* , n3N . ^NTkj'ii 1 nn33i . n3 . nini 7 
1^*1 . na' . fy3"iK . .133 . ^D'> . •'i'ni . no^ . n3 . iiy) 1 N3nnD . y 8 
f3Ni . me'xn . n3 . B'yNi . jy»^y3 . nx . |3ni i •^o'^z , ^j22 . ni 9 
•• . l^JD . n^ . pM . obo . mny . y^i^i . 3^^^ . 1: . t^'Ni 1 |nnp . nx 10 
[»] . Dyn . i»3 . ns . nnxi 1 mnxi . -ip3 . nnni'Ni 1 m^y . nx . /Sitr 1 1 
[d]ni . mn . ^N-iN , riN . Dtr» . 3K'ni i 3N?oh , trMi? . nn . npn 12 
B'N . riNi . pK* . c'N , ns . n3 . 3K'i<i 1 nnp3 . b'D3 . ••JDi? . n3n 1 3 
Si I bai^'' . ijy . n33 . nx . mx . li? . b>)D3 . *!? . -idxm i mn» 14 
fiNi I D-invn . ny . mn^'n . yp3» . ni . Dnn^xi . n^i'3 . ibr] 15 
[-i3]i . m3:i I pji . p[3]3 . p^N* . nysK' , fib . nnsi . nr 16 
[3 . n]N . n^o . npNi 1 nniD-inn . k'D3 . intj'y^ . "-3 1 nomi . n 17 
nS . n33 . i'NnK'^ . ^^oi 1 5^103 . ^jsi? . on . 3nDNi . ni.T . "•!? 18 
[i.*]3SD . tr»3 . n^-ii') I ^3 . nonn^n3 , n3 . 3b>^i . yn> 19 
. nrnsi . }>.T3 . nst^xi 1 ntri . b . k>n . pNO . 3nd» . npx 20 
nom . pyM . n»n . nmp , Tm . n^x 1 pn . ^y . nsD^ 21 
Ni I nni?n3a . '<nn . ijni . nnyc^ . 'nn . i^ni i i^syn 22 
3-ip3 . p[»^ . mJcj'Nn . ixb . 'n^v . I^ni . li'Jo . ri3 . ^nn . i: 23 
5 . iB'y . Dyn , b^ . i^ni . nn-ip3 . ipn . 3ip3 . |n . 131 1 ipn 24 
1DN3 . nnip^ . nni3cn . Tiis . i^ni i nn''33 . i3 . t^»x . m 25 
. piK3 . nborzn . ••n^'y . "jjni . lyiy . ''n33 . ijn i ^t^iK*^ . [■•] 26 
• ]''V . o . 1V3 . ^n:3 . iJN I an , Din . '•3 , n»3 . n3 . Tin .ion 27 
5^0 , 1JK1 I nycK'D . pn . ^js . •'3 . jB^on . pn . b' 28 

n33 . "iJNi I pNn . ijy . tdd'' . ics . pp3 . nso ^n 29 
ipj . na , Dtf . NB'Ni . |y»b3 . n3i 1 pbi . nai , n[3]ito[ . dn] . •• 30 

Ixxxvi Appendix 

B'N . pi fin . nn . y^'^ . jnim i j'nxn ,p^ 31 

i^Ni I pnina • nnn^n . n , a^oa . '•^ . ion^" 32 

B'y . DB^ , m ijyi , *o>2 . i5'03 , na[ty^i] 33 

3N1 I pntJ' . m 34 

1. I am Mesha' son of Chemosh[kan ?], king of Moab, the Da- 

2. -ibonite. My father reigned over Moab for 30 years, and I reign- 

3. -ed after my father. And I made this high place for Chemosh in 

QRHH, a [high place of sal-] 

4. -vation, because he had saved me from all the assailants (?), and 

because he had let me see my pleasure on all them that hated 
me. Omr- 

5. -i king of Israel afflicted Moab for many days, because Chemosh 

was angry with his la- 

6. -nd. And his son succeeded him ; and he also said, I will afflict 

Moab. In my days said he th[us ;] 
; 7. but I saw my pleasure on him, and on his house, and Israel 
perished with an everlasting destruction. And Omri took 
possession of the [la-] 

8. -nd of Mehedeba, and it (i.e. Israel) dwelt therein, during his days, 

and half his son's days, forty years ; but [resto-] 

9. -red it Chemosh in my days. And I built Ba'al-Me'on, and I 

made in it the reservoir (?) ; and I built 

10. Qiryathen. And the men of Gad had dwelt in the land of 

'Ataroth from of old ; and built for himself the king of I- 

1 1. -srael 'Ataroth. And I fought against the city, and took it. And 

I slew all the people [from] 

12. the city, a gazingstock unto Chemosh, and unto Moab. And 

I brought back {or, took captive) thence the altar-hearth of 
Davdoh {or ? PIHIT its (divine) guardian), and I drag- 

13. -ged it before Chemosh in Qeriyyoth. And I settled therein the 

men of shrn, and the men of 

14. MHRTH. And Chemosh said unto me, Go, take Nebo against 

Israel. And I 

15. went by night, and fought against it from the break of dawn until 

noon. And I too- 

The Inscription of Mesha Ixxxvii 

1 6. -k it, and slew the whole of it, 7,000 men and male sojourners, 

and women and [female sojourner-] 

17. -s, and female slaves: for I had devoted it to 'Ashtor-Cheraosh. 

And I took thence the [ves-] 

18. -sels of Yahweh, and I dragged them before Chemosh. And the 

king of Israel had built 

19. Yahaz, and abode in it, while he fought against me. But Chemosh 

drave him out from before me ; and 

20. I took of Moab 200 men, even all its chiefs; and I brought them 

up against Yahaz, and took it 

21. to add it unto Daibon. I built qrhh, the wall of Yearim {or, of 

the Woods), and the wall of 

22. the Mound. And I built its gates, and I built its towers. And 

23. I built the king's palace, and I made the two reser[voirs (?) for 

wajter in the midst of 

24. the city. And there was no cistern in the midst of the city, in 

QRHH. And I said to all the people. Make 

25. you every man a cistern in his house. And I cut out the cutting 

for QRHH with the help of prisoner- 

26. [-S of] Israel. I built 'Aro'er, and I made the highway by the 


27. I built Beth-Bamoth, for it was pulled down. I built Bezer, for 


28. [had it become. And the chie]fs of Daibon were fifty, for all 

Daibon was obedient (to me). And I reign- 

29. -ed [over] an hundred [chiefs] in the cities which I added to the 

land. And I buil- 

30. -t Mehede[b]a, and Beth-Diblathen, and Beth-Ba'al-Me'on ; and 

I brought thither the «a/^a<f (?)-keepers, 
31 sheep of the land. And as for Horonen, there 

dwelt therein and 

32 Chemosh said unto me. Go down, fight against 

Horonen. And I went down 

33. [and] Chemosh [resto]red it in my days. And 


34. And I 

Ixxxviii Appendix 

The Inscription gives particulars of the revolt of Moab from Israel, 
noticed briefly in 2 Ki. i, i = 3, 5. The revolt is there stated to 
have taken place after the death of Ahab; but from line 8 of the 
Inscription it is evident that this date is too late, and that it must 
in fact have been completed by the middle of Ahab's reign. The 
territory N. of the Arnon was claimed by Reuben and (contiguous 
to it on the N.) Gad ; but these tribes were not permanently able to 
hold it against the Moabites. David reduced the Moabites to the 
condition of tributaries (2 Sam. 8, 2); but we infer from this Inscrip- 
tion that this relation was not maintained. Omri, however, determined 
to re-assert the Israelite claim, and gained possession of at least the 
district around Medeba, which was retained by Israel for forty years, 
till the middle of Ahab's reign, when Mesha' revolted. How complete 
the state of subjection was to which Moab had thus been reduced 
is shewn by the enormous tribute of wool paid annually to Israel 
(2 Ki. 3, 4). The Inscription names the principal cities which had 
been occupied by the Israelites, but were now recovered for Moab, 
and states further how Mesha' was careful to rebuild and fortify them, 
and to provide them with means for resisting a siege. Most of the 
places named (1-2, 21, 28 Dibon, 8, 30 Mehedeba, 9 Ba'al-Me'on, 
10 Qiryathen, 10, 11 'Ataroth, 13 Qeriyyoth, 14 Nebo, 19 Yahaz, 
26 'Aro'er, 27 Beth-Bamoth, 30 Beth-Diblathen, Beth-Ba'al-Me'on, 
31 HoronSn) are mentioned in the OT. in the passages which 
describe the territory of Reuben (Nu. 32, 37 f. Jos. 13, 15-23) or 
Gad (Nu. 32, 34-36. Jos. 13, 24-28), or allude to the country held 
by Moab (Is. 15, 2. 4. 5. Jer. 48, i. 3. 18. 19. 21. 22. 23. 24. 34. 41. 
Ez. 25, 9. Am. 2, 2); 27 Bezer in Dt. 4, 43. Jos. 20, 8 : only 3, 21, 
24, 25 nmp, 13 pK', 14 nnriD, 21 \'y)''r\ are not known from the 
Bible. Except, as it seems, Horonaim, all the places named appear 
to have lain within the controverted territory North of the Arnon. 

On the orthography, comp. above pp. xxx-xxxii. i. There 
seems to be room for only two letters after B'Oa . Clermont-Ganneau 
read ^JB'Da ; Lidzb., after a fresh examination of the stone, thinks the 
letter after B' to be a 3, and suggests, though doubtfully, pK'loa (cf. 
in^jlD^, '•''^^i'?). — 1-2. '•Jnnn, 21, 28 pn, i.e. Daibon, not (as pointed 
in MT.) 13'"! Dibon. Had the vowel in the first syllable been merely i, 

The Inscription of Mesha Ixxxix 

it is not probable that the scriptio plena would have been employed. 

2. HK' \vh^ = Heb. r\:^\y CB^^tr. ^'^ as in Phoen. (p. 84 «.); for 

♦riJE?, as nn for *ri33.— 3, nsr ncan = Heb. riNtn ncan : notice (i) the 
fern in n-, as in Phoen., and sporadically in the OT. ; (2) DNT without 
the art., also as in Phoen. (p. xxv). The passage illustrates Is. 15, 2. 
16, 12. Jer. 48, 35 (of Moab); comp. i Ki. 10, 2 (of Solomon). The 
custom of worshipping on ' high-places ' was one shared by the 
Canaanites and Israelites with their neighbours. — nmp, perhaps 'in^ip 
(cf. in"!"!, ^riT, once in i Ki. 16, 34 ^'^T) ; it is against the apparently 
obvious vocalization nri"]^, that ihe/em. is regularly represented in the 
Inscription by n.— 4. \'2h^T\, i.e. pJ'E'lI or Ppj'K'n. T^C'n in Heb. is 
to fling or cast; possibly it was in use in Moabitic in Qal with the 
meaning Ihrow oneself against, attack. The letter is very indistinct : 
p^r2i7 the kings was formerly read ; but Lidzb. agrees with Cl.-G. and 
Nordl. that there is no trace of the shaft of the O, and says that 'of 
all possibilities that of ^ is the greatest.' — ^NfB'-i'sa ""JSnn ^. 59, n. 
118, 7. — 5. 12y^1 (Nold.) and afflicted (Ex. i, 11), the third radical 
being retained. As the text stands, if "^"O be read (as seems natural) 
■^1^9, the "l can only be explained by Tenses, § 1 1 7 a, GK. §111^: this, 
however, is harsh ; so that probably "j^D should be read ^^^, and 71? has 
accidentally been omitted before ^xn^J''' (cf. 1. 2) by the carver of the 
Inscription. — ^?^^.^, impf. Qal {1 Ki. 8, 46), in a freq. sense, though a 
pf. would rather have been expected. The reading f^JNO (i.e. ^3^?^ = 
the Arab. V conjug.) has been suggested : but Lidzb. says that the > is 
clear. — His land: cf. Nu. 21, 29. Jer. 48, 46, where the Moabites are 
called tTDS ny._6. nbj)n>1, cf. U> \^, and Is. 9, 9.— !^33, i.e. Ahab.— 
NH, p. XXX. — Nil DJ, as Jud. 3, 31. 6, 35 al. — "ijyx, i.e. 13y><. — 2, 
probably n3|i (i Ki. i, 48). riNTS (Jud. 8, 8) would, as Hebrew, be 
preferable: but there seems not to be room for more than two 
letters'.— 7. r\i xn.Ki ,/.. 118, 7.— oVy nns Tax,— D^y as xp. 89, 2. 3. 38 

{poetically for D^yb). Or possibly D^j? I^? "'-^J cf. Jer. 51, 39. 
— ^noy K'l*!, as a plup. sense is required, this by the principles of 

^ Smend and Socin imagined that they could read 1313 ; but the traces are far 
too indistinct to make it probable, in view of the close general similarity of the two 
languages, that what is impossible in Hebrew (it should be nTH "1313 or 0^313 
n?Nn) was possible in Moabitic. 

xc Appendix 

Heb. syntax should be tr'V noyi . Or, perhaps, B'l^l should be read. 
—8. N?^nD in Heb. n3T)0._n»^, i. e., if the n be correct, no^ (for 
yamaihu, i. e. VOJ) : cf. the same rare form in Hebrew (see on 

1 Sam. 14, 48; and Wright, Comp. Gramm. p. 158). The original n 
(Stade, § 113. 4) is seen (though not heard) in the Aram. wo»o-. The 
same phrase occurs Jer. 17, 11. — Forty years. On the chronological 
difficulty involved, see EB. iii. 3047. It is relieved, though not 
entirely removed, by reading, with Nordlander and Winckler, n?2 
(like ni?^) his sons' (i. e. Ahaziah and Jehoram), instead of nil hts 
son's. — 8-9. '^9?';1 : the letters supplied were conjectured cleverly by 
Noldeke in 1870, and have been generally accepted. — 9. I9^1. — 
nityxn, prop, depression (cf. nmB'), pit, perhaps an excavation used for 
the storage either of provisions, arms, etc., or (cf. line 23) of water. 
Cf. n^ti'K Ecclus. 50, 3 Heb., of Simon, son of Onias : n-j33 innn nK't? 
iJbna [rd. C!»3] on W^^ mpO = Iv 17/Aepats avTov r)XaTTu>6rj [rd. 
iXarofJ.'qOrjj dTro8o)(^£LOV rSartov, ^aX/cos [rd., with A, Xa/<KOs] wcrct 
6akaaa-q<; to irepLfJLeTpov. — lO. |nj"]p (Nold.), in Heb. 0^0^!?- — ^^] 
(Jud. 20, 17, etc.). — ni?, Heb. i^. — 11. Dnri_^K1 from Dnn!?n=Arab. 
Vni conj. — "1133 against the city. — nTnNI. — 12. K'037 nn a spectacle 
unto Cheynosh: cf. Nah. 3, 6. Ez. 28, 17. — Either SK'NI (Jos. 14, 7), or 
(Clermont-Ganneau, Renan) 3^??1. — ?N"lt<, to be explained probably 
from Ez. 43, 15. 16 of the hearth of the altar, which was prized by the 
captors as a kind of ' spolia opima ' (Smend and Socin, p. 4). But 
this explanation is not certain. — n*in , apparently the name, or title, 
of a god: cf. KAT? 225, 483; EB. i. 1126, 1127.— 12-13. "^CP?J 
Jer. 22, 19. 2 Sam. 17, 13. — 13. K'M ""JS^, cf. m.T '•Jq!? i Sam. 15, 33. 

2 Sam. 21, 9. — 2B'X1: 2 Ki. 17, 24. — 14. And Chemosh said to me. 
Go, take, etc. ; similarly 1. 32 : comp. Jos. 8, i ; Jud. 7, 9 ; i Sam. 
23, 4; 2 Ki. 18, 25^. — 14-15. 'H-'Jlvl' cf. Job 16, 22. 23, 8 : in prose 
once (in 3 ps.) Ex. 9, 23. — 15. n^^3 = Heb. nb)p2. — yp2n, cf. Is. 
58, 8: the ordinary Hebrew equivalent would be ID^'n riib^O. — 16. 
n??, J^*^??, men, women. On the D^")?., cf. on 2 Sam. i, 13. — 17. J^bn"!, 
Jud. 5, 30: female slaves are probably meant. — 'Ashtor-Chemosh, ac- 
cording to Baethgen, Beitrage, 254 ff.\ a compound deity, of a type 

* Cf. pp. 39, 47 f., 84-7; so also G. A. Barton, in an article on 'West-Semitic 
Deities with Compound ISiames,' JBLit. 1901, p. 22 ff. ; H. P. Smith in an art. on 

The Inscription of Meshd xci 

of which other examples are cited from Semitic mythology. The 
male 'Ashtor is a South-Semitic deity, ib. i i7ff. ; cf. Encycl. of Religion 
and Ethics, \\. w^. — '^J?9"^[!|0: see p. 131. — 17-18. ""^[a . n]N, others 
supply "'i'[N"i]N, cf. 1. 12. Renan says that the last two letters of 1. 17 
are quite ' dans la nuit,' and that 'h'2 DX ' garde toute sa probabilite.' 
Against *!?N"1N he objects the absence of nx (contrast 1. 12), and the 
p/«ra/ (contrast the sing. 1. 12). — 18. DH (if, as seems to be the case, 
the reading is correct) must be a case of the independent pron. used 
as an accus., cf. Aram, ^^sn (Ezr. 4, 10 etc.). — 19. '^2"aK'>l, i.e. he 
made it a post of occupation during his war with Mesha'. — nonn^na, 
i.e. on the analogy of the inf. of the Arab. VIII, nbnripn3: cf. the 
Heb. place-names jnJOnfS, ^NPiK'K (see on i Sam. 30, 28).— nb'-jri 
(provided JTI^ be masc). ""iSD B'^a : Mesha' speaks of CDD in exactly 
the same terms which the Hebrew used of miT, Dt. 33, 27. Jos. 
24,18.-20. |nxo, in Heb. D^riNO.— nkmi.— 2 1 . nsoS (Nold.) from 

'Theophorous Proper Names in the OT.' in the Harper Memorial Studies (1908), 
i. p. 48. Among the names cited are Milk-'Ashtart (mncy3?0 : Cooke, NSI. 
10. 2-3), Eshmun-'Ashtart (mntrj/JDC^K : NSI. p. 49), mpbo3DB'K iib), 
■nK32DS {CIS.l. i. 118), hvy^^ and "IDND^D {NSI. pp. 49, 103, 104), 
eiXin-ip^D {NSI. 150, 5), mp^mSand nam^ (^\Azh. Nordsem.Epigr.ii(>,iii); 
Atargatis (njiy^ny : ?.&t PRE. ^ ox Encycl. of Religion and Ethics, s. v.); and the 
Bab. Adar-Malik, and Anu-Malik : in each case, a fusion of the personalities and 
characters of the deities named being supposed to have taken place. Baudissin, 
however, argues strongly that in all these cases the second name is in the genitive, 
so that we should render 'Ashtor of Chemosh, Eshmun of 'Ashtart, etc., the 
meaning being that 'Ashtor, for instance, was the associate of Chemosh, and 
worshipped in his temple {Adonis und Esmun, 191 1, pp. 259-66, 269, 274-9; 
cf. PRE.^ ii. (1897), 157, vii. 293; and Moore in EB. i. 737). Ed. Meyer {Der 
Papyrtisfund von Elephantine, 1 91 2, p. 62 f.) takes the same view. These Papyri 
exhibit other remarkable names of deities of the same type, viz. Pap. 18, col. 7. 5 
i'Sn''n?3t^'K ; ib. 1. 6 i?Nn"'3njy 'Anath-Bethel or 'Anath of Bethel [' Bethel ' being 
the name of a deity : cf. Pap. 34. 5 jrUliT' 13 inJ^Xn^l— the name formed 
exactly like |nJin\ \T\'h^; CIS. II. i. 54 ■'jijni^NJT'n (cf. .1^^"^) ; and ITAT.^ 
437 f.] ; Pap. 27. 7 i5Nn'>3mn [mn another divine name ; cf. Pap. 34. 4 irUDin 
|n37Xn''3 12] ; and even (Pap. 32. 3) inTlJy 'Anath-Yahweh or Yahweh's 'Anath 
('Anath as belonging to, or associated with, Yahweh). See further Sachau, 
Papyri aus . . . Elephantine (1911), pp. 82-5; Meyer, pp. 57-65; Bumey, 
Church Quarterly Review, July 191 2, pp. 403-6. It is now clear that in Zech. 7, 
2 "IJfN'lti' t5J<"n''3 should be read as one word, 'And Bethelsarezer sent,' etc. 

xcii Appendix 

^P^ Pointed irregularly by the Massorites nbpp nbpp Nu. 32, 14. 
Is. 30, I. — ^V^^ ^'^^ woods, — probably the name of a place. — 22. 
nri$^3D._2 3. -J^D na i Ki. 16, 18.— ^xb? either both (Nold.), cf. 

^^1)U, )liSVA>:, or possibly Me locks or fi?a»/i', from the root N?3. — PP? 
/^r water. — 24. ">3 cistern. — |N=Heb. PN (Gen. 47, 13 ; cf. on i Sam. 
21, 2). — 25. Probably nnnssn (or nhiDlsri) a cutting (or cuttings) 
of some sort : the special application must remain uncertain. — K»N 
nn''33 13 ; for the custom of every house having its cistern, cf. 2 Ki. 
18, 31, and, in the ancient Leja (see DB. i. 146), on the East of 
Jordan, Burckhardt, Travels in Syria (1822), p. iiof., cited by 
Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. on Lebanon, Damascus, and 
Beyond Jordan, p. 469, and ^^. i. 88. — 25-6. '^.1?S3. — 26. n^D»n = 
Heb. npp»n. — 27. riDn nn, probably the same place as mm Nu. 
21, 19; \>^1 ni»3 22, 41. Jos. 13, 17. — D"in I Ki. 18, 30.— |*V Mic. 
3, 12. — 28. Before B>, there is space for four or five letters. After jiy, 
'T? (or? '"'J'? Is. 16, 4) suggests itself naturally as the first word 
of 1. 28. The conjecture ^\}V\ has the support of 1. 20, and is the 
restoration usually accepted : but Haldvy suggests B'[n3] for tJ'[~i3], 
i.e. 'I built Bezer, for ruins it had become, with the help of {d. 1. 25) 
fifty men of Daibon,' etc. — nyDtJ*©, see p. 182 note. — 29. If TlS^O 
28-9 be correct (the 3 is not quite certain), the next word must almost 
necessarily be 7y : the two letters for which space still remains may be 
t^n (as exhibited in the translation). Lines 28-29 will then describe 
the number of chiefs, i.e. either heads of families, or warriors, over 
whom Mesha' ruled in Daibon itself (if ^"W is right in 1. 28), and 
in the cities which he recovered. — Pi?? in the cities (Clermont-Ganneau, 
Smend and Socin) : with what follows, cf. the expression used of 
Yahaz 11. 20-21. — 30. Ipb, if the reading be correct, — pj is 'possible,' 
says Lidzbarski, though the letters seem to him to be j;»,— will allude 
to the persons engaged in cultivating the breed of sheep, small and 
stunted in growth, but prized on account of their wool (see on Am. 
I, I in the Cambridge Bible), for which Moab was famous. It is the 
word which is actually used of Mesha' himself in 2 Ki. 3, 4. — 32. Cf. 
1. 14. With go down Clermont-Ganneau pertinently compares Jer. 
48, 5 which speaks of the D''mn TTl» or descent to Horonaim. — 
33. No doubt n^K'jl as 11. 8-9.— Hal^vy proposes DB'O PIT !?jn 'And 

The Inscription of MeshcC xciii 

beside it there was set/ supposing the sequel to relate to a guard of 
twenty men ; but the sing, followed by [pOB' \'\^'^ is difficult. 

The language of Moab is far more closely akin to Hebrew than 
any other Semitic language at present known (though it may be 
conjectured that the languages spoken by Ammon and Edom were 
approximately similar) : in fact, it scarcely differs from it otherwise 
than dialectically \ In syntax, form of sentence, and general mode 
of expression, it is entirely in the style of the earlier narratives con- 
tained in the historical books of the OT. The vocabulary, with two 
or three exceptions, not more singular than many a aTrat elprjfxevov 
occurring in the OT., is identical with that of Hebrew. In some 
respects, the language of the Inscription even shares with Hebrew 
distinctive features, as the waw conv. with the impf,, y^^'in to save, 
HB'y to make, D3, '3 UNI, CJ'T' to take in possession, nn, "JD^, the dual 
Qinv, nnnn to dan, B'-iJ, 2''\p2, and especially "ifi^. It shares ^JX 
with Hebrew and Phoenician, against Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic 
(WN, bl, hii). 

The most noticeable differences, as compared with Hebrew, are 
nxf noan {not nxin as in Hebrew), the n of the fem. sg., and the 
\ of the dual (except in Dinx^ 15) and plural, the n and f of the 
plural both occurring only sporadically in the OT.^, the conj. Dnnirt, 
■(■•p city, rriN II, 14 to take a city (Heb. 1??); and the following 
words, which, though they occur in the OT., are not the usual prose 
terms, Pj^n 6 to succeed, yp3 1 5 of the break of dawn, n^ji and n^aa 
16 (in a context such as the present, the normal Hebrew expression 
would be XWi^a. and Ct^j), nbn") 17, N:^'3 20, 30. 

* By a happy instinct the truth was divined by Mr. (afterwards Sir George) Grove, 
six years before any Moabite document whatever was known, in his interesting 
article MoAB, in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible (p. 399*): 'And from the origin of 
the nation and other considerations we may perhaps conjecture that their language 
was more a dialect of Hebrew than a different tongue^ 

- If this be really a dual, and not a nominal form in -y- '■ cf. GK. § 88"= (com- 
paring p. 2, below), and on the other side Konig, ii. p. 437, iii. § 257''. 

' The J 25 times, mostly dialectically, or late (GK. § 87* [add, as the text stands, 
2 S. 21, 20] ; Stade, § 323*), and some doubtful textually, 15 times being in Job, but 
even there irregularly (}vD 13 times, against DvD 10 times). On the T\ of the 
fern., see GK. § 80'. «. 

xciv Appendix 

The chief features of historical interest presented by the Inscription 
may be summarized as follows: (i) the re-conquest of Moab by 
Omri; (2) the fact that Mesha"s revolt took place in the middle of 
Ahab's reign, not after his death (as stated, 2 Ki. i, i); (3) particulars 
of the war by which Moab regained its independence ; (4) the extent 
of country occupied and fortified by Mesha'; (5) the manner and 
terms in which the authority of Chemosh, the national deity of Moab, 
is recognized by Mesha'; (6) the existence of a sanctuary of Yahweh 
in Nebo ^ ; (7) the state of civilization and culture which had been 
reached by Moab at the end of the tenth century b.c. Sir George 
Grove, in the article referred to on the last page, writes (p. 396) : 
'The nation appears' from allusions in the OT.'^ 'as high-spirited, 
wealthy, populous, and even, to a certain extent, civilized, enjoying 
a wide reputation and popularity .... In its cities we discern a " great 
multitude" of people Hving in "glory," and in the enjoyment of 
" great treasure," crowding the public squares, the house-tops, and 
the ascents and descents of the numerous high-places and sanctuaries, 
where the " priests and princes " of Chemosh minister to the anxious 
devotees .... In this case there can be no doubt that among the 
pastoral people of Syria, Moab stood next to Israel in all matters 
of material wealth and civilization.' This conclusion is confirmed 
by the Inscription. The length, and finished literary form, of the 
Inscription shew that the Moabites, in the ninth century B.C., were 
not a nation that had recently emerged from barbarism ; and Mesha' 
reveals himself in it as a monarch capable of organizing and con- 
solidating his dominions by means similar to those adopted by 
contemporary sovereigns in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. 

* The reading niH^ is quite certain ; the letters can be read distinctly on the 
plaster-cast of the stone in the British Museum. 
2 Chiefly Is. 15—16; Jer. 48. 

Note on the Maps xcv 


The Maps in this volume have been drawn by Mr. B. V. Darbishire, of Oxford. 
The Map of the Pass of Michmas is reproduced, by permission, from a Map by 
Gustaf Dalman, the well-known Hebrew and Aramaic scholar, now Director of the 
German Evangelical Archaeological Institute in Jerusalem, in the ZDMG. (see 
particulars in the note attached to the Map) : and the three Maps of Sections of 
Palestine are based upon Maps published by the Palestine Exploration Fund, and 
by Messrs. John Bartholomew & Co., of Edinburgh. In the three last-named Maps 
the coloured contours, geographical features, and modern sites, are reproduced 
(with permission) from the sources mentioned : the ancient sites have been repro- 
duced from them only after a careful examination of the data on which the 
determination of the sites depends, such as rest upon questionable or inconclusive 
grounds being marked by a query, while those which rest upon clearly insufficient 
grounds are omitted altogether. The identification of a modern with an ancient site 
depends mostly, it must be remembered, in cases in which the ancient name itself 
has not been unambiguously preserved, partly upon historical, but very largely upon 
philological considerations : and men who are admirable surveyors, and who can 
write valuable descriptions of the physical features, topography, or antiquities of a 
country, are not necessarily good philologists. Hence the | in. to the mile Map 
of Palestine containing ancient sites, published by the P. E. F., Bartholomew's 
Maps, and in fact current English Maps of Palestine in general (with the exception of 
those in the Encyclopaedia Biblicd), include many highly questionable and uncertain 
identifications^. Maps described as being 'according to the P. E. F. Survey' are 
not better than others : the description is in fact misleading ; for the ' Survey ' 
relates only to the physical geography, and modern topography of the country : the 
ancient sites marked on such a map are an addition to what is actually determined 
by the ' Survey : ' the authority attaching to the ' Survey '" does not consequently 
extend to them at all ; and, as a matter of fact, many rest upon a most precarious 
basis. In the articles and notes referred to above (p. X «.), I have taken a number 
of names, including, for instance, Succoth and Penuel {Exp. Times, xiii. 457 ff.), 
Luhith (Is. 15, 5 ; ib. xxi. 495 ff.), and Ja'zer (Is. 16, 8, and elsewhere ; ib. xxi. 
562 f.), and shewn in detail how very uncertain the proposed identifications are ^. 

An example or two may be mentioned here. The compilers of the f in. to the 
mile P. E. F. Map, referred to above, mark on the SW. of the Sea of Galilee the 

^ On the principles which should regulate the identification of modern Arabic with 
ancient Hebrew place-names, the scholarly articles of Kampffmeyer, ZDPV, xv 
(1892), 1-33, 65-116, xvi (1893), 1-71, should be consulted. 

' Guthe's beautiful and very complete Bibelatlas in 20 Haupt- und 28 Neben- 
karten (191 1) may be commended to English students as eminently instructive 
and scholarly. And the forthcoming Historical Atlas of the Holy Land, by 
G. A. Smith, is likely to prove in all respects adequate and trustworthy. 

xcvi Note on the Maps 

' Plain of Zaanaim : ' Bartholomew, in the Map at the beginning of vol. i of 
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, does the same, and even goes further; for, both 
in this and in other maps designed by him, he inserts on the NW. of Hebron — in 
this case without the support of the P. E. F. Map — the ' Plain of Mamre.' But 
both these 'plains' are purely imaginary localities; for, as every Hebrew scholar 
knows, though 'plain' is the rendering of JvN and p?S in AV., both words 
really mean a tree, most probably a terebinth or an oak, and they are so rendered 
in the Revised Version (Gen. 12, 6, etc.: Jos. 19, 33 ; Jud. 4, 11). On the other 
hand, the P. E. F. authorities, for some inscrutable reason, have never accepted 
Robinson's identification of Gibeah ( = Gibeah of Benjamin and Gibeah of Saul) 
with Tell el-Ful, 2| miles N. of Jerusalem ^: it is accordingly, in the f in. to the 
mile map, not marked at this spot, but confused with Geba ; and Bartholomew, in 
his maps, including even those edited by G. A. Smith 2, confuses it with Geba 
likewise. It is true, the two names have sometimes been accidentally interchanged 
in the Massoretic text*: but Is. 10, 29 shews incontrovertibly not only that they 
were two distinct places, but also, taken in conjunction with Jud. 19, 13, that 
Gibeah must have lain between Ramah and Jerusalem, very near the highway 
leading from Jerusalem to the North, which is just the position of Tell el-Ful. 
Unless, however, the relative positions of Gibeah and Geba are properly appre- 
hended, there are parts of the narratives of Jud. 19 — 20, and i Sam. 13 — 14, which 
it is impossible to understand. 

In the transliteration of modern Arabic place-names, I have endeavoured to insert 
the hard breathing ( = p) and the diacritical points in accordance with either 
Buhl's excellent Geographie des alten Paldstina, or E. H. Palmer's Arabic and 
English Name Lists published by the P. E. F., though I fear I may not in all cases 
have secured entire accuracy. Still less, I am afraid , have I attained consistency in 
marking the long vowels. But I trust that these imperfections will not impair the 
usefulness of the Maps for those for whom they are primarily designed, viz. students 
of the history. The frequent Kk., I should add, stands for Khurbet ( = 113111)^ 
ruin, milled site. 

1 Comp. Grove's art. Gibeah in Smith's Diet, of the Bible, Stenning's art. 
Gibeah in DB., and below, p. 69. 

2 Who himself adopts the Tell el-Ful site {Jerusalem, ii. 92 «.). 

* The reader will do well to mark on the margin of his RV. Gibeah against Geba 
in Jud. 20, 33 ('on the west of Gibeah:' in v. 10 the correction is made already 
in EVV. ; in v. 31 put Gibeon against Gibeah"), i Sam. 13, 3 (see 10, 5) ; and Geba 
against Gibeah in Jud. 20, 43. i Sam. 13, 2 (see v. 16). 14, 2 (see 13, 16). 16; 
also, vdth a (?), against Gibeon, 2 Sam. 2, 24. In 2 Sam. 5, 25, on the other 
hand, Gibeon (LXX ; i Ch. 14, 16) is better than Geba; and in 2 Sam. 21,6 read 
probably (see the note ; and cf. v. 9) ' in Gibeon, in the mountain ("innN of Yahweh * 
for * in Gibeah of Saul, the chosen one ("IHS) of Yahweh.* 




1, I — 4, i^. Birth a7id youth of Sa?nueL Announcement of the 
fall of Ell's house. 

1, I. *inx t^''N] The same idiomatic use of nnx, especially with \i^^, 
in the sense of a certain (man), qmda?n, as II i8, lo. Jud. 9, 53 HB'S 

nnx; 13, 2 mjo lotri ''jnn nnsK'no ny-i>»*D "ins' tJ'''N \ti. i Ki. 13, n. 
20, 13. 2 Ki. 4, I al. 

D''S1V DTiDin] Grammatically indefensible. D''31V cannot be a ptcp. 
in apposition with DTlonn; for this, being fem., would require nisiv 
(cf. mD"l D''yy i/^. i8, 28 etc.),— not to say niDiJfn ; nor can it, as Keil 
supposes, be a genitive (!) after DTlDnn 'the two heights of the 
Zophites ^' LXX has Sct^a l^ opovs "E^pat/x, pointing to ""SIJ? for 
CSI^f'^, the D of "iHD having been in MT. accidentally written twice, 
'a certain man of Ramathaim, a Zuphite of the hill-country of 
Ephraim ' (so We. Klo. Bu. etc. ; GK. § 125b). The district in which 
Ramah lay was called SjIV f"ix {ch. 9, 5): either therefore Zuph was 
actually the name of an ancestor of Elqanah {v. it>, i Ch. 6, 20 Qre; 
il). V. \\ Zophai [see p. 4]), and the ^"^ J*"1N was so called from its 
having been originally settled by the family of Zuph (cf. 27, 10 333 
vNOmTl ; 30, 14 373 3JJ : see the notes), or, as is more probable 
(We. al.), the land is in the genealogy personified as the ancestor 
(cf. ' Gilead,' Nu. 26, 29. Jos. 17, i al.). 

DTirDin] i.e., at least according to the present orthography, 'The 
two heights.' It is, however, the opinion of many scholars (see esp. 

1 The reference to Ew. § 286« is inconclusive : the first word in the instances 
there cited being in the construct state (on i Ki. 4, 12 see on II 20, 15). 

2 1 .and "• are often interchanged in Hebrew and LXX : cf. 9, 5 ^u<p = f)iy. 
LXX must have read ""aiif as 'Dli* : cf. 'A/Seaaa 26, 6 al., 'Pez/Ja 11 23, 29 (We.). 

1365 B 

The First Book of Samuel, 

Philippi, ZDMG. 1878, pp. 64-67, Sirack, Genesis'', p. 135 f.; GK. 
§ 88 c) that in this and many other proper names, if not in all, the dual 
form is not original, but is a later artificial expansion of an original 
substantival termination in D-p (GK. §§ 85^, ioof^,li). This is based 
partly upon the fact that in parallel texts several of these names occur 
without the ^', partly upon the fact that many of the duals yield 
a meaning improbable in itself as the name of a place, or inconsistent 
with the character of the places so far as they have been identified ; 
and partly on the fact that the most common of these dual forms 
u}^T\\^ is shewn by the Tell el-Amarna tablets to have ended origin- 
ally in -im (so Ci^lD.?, in D''"inj"D1N, is in the Tell el-Amarna letters 
Narima : of. IH*?^) which must have arisen out of n9?^> Aram, form of 
the Heb. pl'pb', 'Samaria'). Thus we have D:rj;n Gen. 38, 21, but 
^r?^ Jos. 15, 34 (cf. noM Gen. 37, i7'\ but jnM iby^\ 2 Ki. 6, 13-); 
D^nnjp I Ch. 6, 6I^ but |J?"ii^ Jos. 21, 32 ; D*n^"]p (Nu. 32, 37. Jos. 13, 
ipl Jer. 48, I. 23^Ez. 25, 9^), D^n^nrn^? (Jer. 48, 22^), D^^^h (Is. 
'5. 5^- Jer. 48, 3^ 5^ 34^), but in Mesha's inscr., 1. 10 jn^p, 1. 30 
jn^^T nn, 11. 31, 32 pnin. Other dual forms of nouns cited by Philippi 
andStrackare D^bas Is. 15, S"; D^J^^5^ 2 Ch.ii, 9; Dr-?t<=' 28.13,23; 
t^'H^n? Jos. 15, 36; D'J?? 2 S. 4, 3^ Neh. 11, 33; D^isn Jos. 19, 19; 
D^inn Gen. 32, 3. Jos. 13, 26. 30. 21, 38 (= i Ch. 6, 65 «). 2 S. 2, 8^°. 
12^ 29. 17, 24". 27^ 19, 33"- I Ki. 2, 8'-^ 4,141^; D^nnj? Jos. 15, 36; 
D^^^rr?^ Ez. 47, lo*'; n^lOif Jos. 18, 22. 2 Ch. 13, 4^^; D^^f? Jos. 21, 
22 ; onJ'ir Jos. 15, 36 « : cf. m^V 2 Ch. 13, 19 Qre (Kt. psy)". Still 
all these do not necessarily fall into the same category, and some may 
have been really duals. In several, as the notes will have shewn, the 
dual is also expressed in LXX (cod. B). If there were two hills at 
Samuel's village, as there are at Gezer, D^n^"]? would be a very natural 
name for it. And we have the corresponding form «i-ksio»^^ in the 
Syr. version of i Mace, it, 34. Cf. Konig, ii. 437 ; and note the forcible 
arguments of G. B. Gray, EB. iii. 3319. 

1 LXX (A) each time AojOaufi. 2 lxX (B) AwOauix. ^ LXX -aifi. 

* LXX TioKem napaeaXaaaias ( = HD'' finp). ^ LXX -lei//. « LXX 

.(ifi. ' LXX ASojpai. 8 LXX TeeOat. » lxX MaavaiO. '» LXX 

-affi. ^^ LXX -atifi. ^^ LXX MaavattTov. *' LXX "Xoftopav. 

" LXX Ecppwv. ^^ Codd. AS corruptly 'Pa9afifiv : others "PafxaOiix. 

I-^ 3 

The transition from eiiher D^nDin or D^ionn to nD^n in v.\^ is, 
however, abrupt and strange. In MT. the form occurs here alone, 
Samuel's home being elsewhere always nD"in. LXX has kpfjuaOatfji not 
only here, but also wherever nD">n occurs accidetiially with n, in conse- 
quence of the n of motion being attached to it (nn?D~in), i, 19. 2, 11. 
7, 17. 8, 4. 15, 34. 16, 13. 19,18. 22, as well asfornD"i3 in 25, i. 28, 3 : 
in 19, 19. 22. 23. 20, I (asinjud. 4, 5) for nmait haseV'Pa/Aa. In 25,1. 
28, 3 cod. A has 'Pa/xa : in this cod. therefore nj3in is consistently 'Pafia, 
DTlDin (or Dn?D"in) and nriDiri are consistently ApfjutOaifi. Probably, 
however, this is merely a correction of a kind not unfrequent in cod. A, 
made with the view of assimilating the Greek text more closely to the 
Hebrew, and not a part of the original LXX. It is scarcely possible to 
frame an entirely satisfactory explanation of the variations. It seems 
clear that in 2, 11 etc. ApfxaOai/x is due to the presence of the n in the 
form of the Hebrew word there read by the translators : but it would 
be precarious to conclude that this was actually DTiDin (or Dno"in). 
From the abruptness of the change in v. ig to the sing., We. thinks it 
probable that the original form of the name was the singular, which in 
the first instance stood in the Hebrew text everywhere, but that the 
dual form came into use subsequently, and was introduced as a cor- 
rection in I, I in MT.; in LXX 'Pa^ia was originally the uniform 
rendering, but in course of time an artificial distinction was drawn 
between HDin and nntDin, and when this was done it was introduced 
into the text of LXX — in cod. B, however, in 19, 19 — 20, i only, in 
cod. A uniformly ('Pa/Aa = TOin : ApfxaOaL/jL = nnttin). Klo. ingeni- 
ously proposes to punctuate D^riDin'p ' from the Ramathites ' (so Bu. 
Sm.; not Now.), cf. TlDin i Ch. 27, 27: but this is not the usual 
manner in which a person's native place is designated in the OT. 

rH2")n is the name of several places mentioned in the OT. ; and the site of 
this one is not certain. The best known is the ' Ramah ' of Is. 10, 29, which is 
certainly the modem er-Rdm, 5 miles N. of Jerusalem. Bu. argues in favour 
of this ; but does not overcome the presumption that the unnamed city, the home 
of Samuel in ch. 9, which was clearly (comp. 10, 2 with 9, 4 f.) N. of Benjamin, 
and consequently not er-Ram, was the Ramathaim of i, i and the Ramah of 
I, 19, etc. Eusebius {Onoinastica^ , ed. Lagarde, 225, 11-14) says that Ramathaim 
was near Diospolis (Lydda), to which Jerome {ib. 96, 18) adds 'in the district of 
Timnah;' and i Mace. 11, 34 speaks of ' Ramathem ' as a toparchy which had 
belonged to Samaria, but was transferred in B.C. 145 to Jerusalem: Eusebius 

B 2 

The First Book of Samuel, 

(288, II f.) and Jerome (146, 23 f.) also identify Arimathaea (= Ramathaini) with 
'Pe/i^is or Remfthis, in the territory of Diospolis. These statements would point 
either (Buhl, Geogr., p. 170; Now. ; cf. ff. G. 254) to Beit-Rtma, a village on a 
hill, 12 miles NW. of Bethel, 13 miles ENE. of Lydda, and 2 miles N. of Timnah, 
or (Guthe, Kurzes Bibehvdrterb., 1903, p. 536 ; Lagrange) to Rentis, a small 
village 5 miles W. of Beit-Rima, and 9 miles NE. of Lydda. H. P. Smith and 
others have thought of Rdni-Allah, a village standing on a high ridge, 3 miles SW. 
of Bethel : but either Beit-Rima or Rentis has better ancient authority in its 
favour. See further DB. iv. 198. 

ami] LXX 'lepe/xcT^A, i.e. bNtpni^ ^ Yerahme'el, perhaps rightly 
(the name Yeroham occurs elsewhere). The pedigree of Samuel is 
given twice besides, with variations similar to those which usually occur 
in parallel passages in the OT., especially in lists of names : — 

I Sam. I, I. 







I C/;. 6, 1 3-1 1 

(LXX 28-26). 

13 Samuel 
12 Elqanah 



II Nahath'-^ 

I Ch.(i, 18-20 
(LXX 33-35)- 

18 Samuel 

19 Elqanah 

20 Qre Zuph * 

Tnax] This word appears to represent Elqanah not merely as 
resident in Ephraim (CISN "IHD), but as an Ephraimiie ; in i Ch. 6 he 
is represented as a Levite, of the descendants of Qohath(Nu. 3, 27 etc). 
The discrepancy is hard to reconcile. Jud. 1 7, 7 the expression ' of the 
family of Judah,' applied to a Levite, has been supposed to shew that 
Levites settled in a particular tribe may have been reckoned as belong- 
ing to it; but even if that were the case^, the addition M? Xini would 

^ Thenius bXD")'', on which We., De Geniibus et Faviiliis Judaeis quae 
I Ch. 2. 4. mimeranttir (Gottingae, 1870), remarks justly (p. 27), ' Dresdense 
potius quam Hebraeum^ 

^ So Vulg. Pesh. ; LXX Vi.aivaQ. No doubt the 3 is an error for D, the two 
letters being somewhat similar in the old character, though which of the three 
forms is original cannot be definitely determined, probably Tohu. In any case 
Keil's explanation of the variation is untenable. 

3 LXX (Bj 0ete, (A) 0ooi/e, Vulg. Thohu, i.e. Tohu as in i, i. Pesh. Ijsj-l. 

* So also LXX, Vulg.; Kt. Ziph. 

* It is more probable that ' Levite ' denotes there a profession, rather than 
membership in a tribe : see Moore, ai loc; McNeile, Exodus, pp. Ixvi I., 26. 

!_^ 5 

there make the double relationship clear; here the addition TnSN 
seems to shew that the narrator has no consciousness of Samuel's 
Levitical descent. The explanation that the term designates Elqanah 
as an Ephraimite, merely so far as his civil rights and standing were 
concerned, makes it express nothing more than what is virtually de- 
clared in V. ^, and moreover implies a limitation which is not, at least, 
sustained by usage. It is a question whether the traditions embodied 
in Ch. have been handed down uniformly in their original form, and 
whether in some cases the genealogies have not been artificially com- 
pleted. The supposition that Samuel was really of Ephraimite descent, 
and was only in later times reckoned as a Levite, is the simplest 
explanation of the divergence. 

2. D''K^'3 TltJ' 1^1] The order, and form of sentence, as 17, 12. 25, 2 
(cf. 36), II 14, 30. 17, 18. 23, 18. 22. Jud. 3, 16. Zech. 5,9. Dan. 
8, 3 etc. 

nns'] The numeral, being definite in itself, may dispense with the 
art.; cf. 13, 17. 18 ; Nu. 28, 4 : Ew. § 290^; GK. §§ 126^, 134^ But 
in a connexion such as the present nnxn would be more classical 
(Gen. 2,11. 4, 19. 10, 25 (all belonging to the Pentateuchal source J); 
Dt. 21,15; II 4) 2), and ought probably to be restored. It is read by 
several MSS. 

NTl] before the plural D'''^?^ according to GK. § 145°; Ew. § 3163-. 
So not unfrequently : e.g. with the same verb Gen. i, 14. 5, 23. Jud. 

20, 46. I Ki. 13, 33 T\\'Cil "'3n3 TIM that there might be {Tenses, § 63) 
priests of the high places. 

3. n?j;i] The pf. with waw conv. has a frequentative force, used to 
go up; comp. 4^-7='', where observe that it interchanges, not with the 
bare perfect, the tense of simple narrative, but with the imp/., which 
likewise expresses habituation: see Tetises, § 120, GK. § ii2'i<l; and 
comp. Ex. 17, II. 18, 26. Jud. 2, 18 f. etc. 

no^D'' D''D''D] The same phrase, likewise with reference to the obser- 
vance of a pilgrimage or sacred season, 2, 19*. Ex. 13, 10. Jud. 11, 40. 

21, igt. D"'ID'', lit. days, tends by usage to denote the definite period 
of a year: cf. v. 21. 2, 19b; and on 27, 7. 

npc^] now Seilim, in a secluded nook, 9^m. N. of Bethel, and 11 m. 
S. of Shechem. See the writer's art. in DB. s.v. 

The First Book of Samuel, 

'J1 DB'l] LXX Ktti IkCi HXei Kal ol Sw viol avrov, which has been 
supposed to point to vV ''^^ ^^^^ v5^ CltJ'l. Some itidependent notice of 
Eli seems to be presupposed by v. 9 : either, therefore (Th. Klo.), 1 vj? 
has dropped out in MT., or (We.) the mention of Eli origimWy preceded 
V. 3, perhaps in the course of some more comprehensive narrative of 
the period, of which the life of Samuel which we still possess formed 
but an episode : in the latter case, the reading of LXX will be a cor- 
rection, introduced for the purpose of supplying the deficiency which 
thus arose in the narrative. 

4. DVn NTl] The same idiomatic expression recurs 14, i. 2 Ki. 4, 
8. II. 18. Job I, 6. 13. 2, it. Is it, now, to be construed 'And there 
was a day (Job i, 6 AV), and . . . ,' or 'And it fell on a day (2 Ki. 4, 8 
AV.), and . . .'? (GK. § 1268; We.) Modern authority is in favour 
of the second of these alternatives : but the fact that Dm when used as 
an adverbial accusative signifies regularly to-day may authorize the 
inference that in this phrase it was conceived as a nomitiative, i.e. as 
the subject of \'T'1 (cf. 20, 24 li'inn NT'l). In either case the definite 
article, where we should use the indefinite, is in accordance with the 
Hebrew manner of thought : in the mind of the Hebrew narrator, the 
day is connected in anticipation with the events about to be described 
as happening upon it, and is thus regarded as defined. Comp. ISDn 
Nu. 5, 23, ^ann Jos. 2, 15, the scroll, the cord, defined in anticipation 
as those taken for a particular purpose, where our idiom can only 
employ a: see on 6, 8. 10, 25. 19, 13 ; and cf. GK. /.r. 

jn3"l] 4'^-7* is parenthetical, describing what Elqanah's habit was 
(see on v. 3) : the narrative of the particular occasion 4*'^ is resumed 
in 7^ naani. Render therefore (for the emendations adopted, see the 
notes below) : ' {v. 3) And that man used to go up, etc. ... (57. 4) And 
there fell a day, and Elkanah sacrificed: now he tised to give to 
Peninnah, etc. . . . : (t'. 7) and so used she to do year by year; as often 
as they went up to the house of Yahweh, so used she to vex her ; and 
she wept [on the present occasion] and did not eat. {v. 8) And 
Elkanah her husband said to her, etc' 

ni^D] portions, viz. of the flesh partaken of at the sacrificial meal : 
cf. 9, 23. 

Notice here the position of the object at the etid, where it rounds 

1- 3-S 7 

off the sentence and brings it to its close. The English order, in such 
a case, would produce a very weak sentence in Hebrew. For two 
striking instances of the same order, see Jer. 13, 13. Am. 6, 14 : cf. 
Ex. 8, 17^; and see further on II 14, 12. 

5. D*EXj Many attempts have been made to find a meaning for this 
word, at once defensible philologically, and suited to the context. It 
has been rendered (i) ' heavily.' So, for instance, the Vulgate {/n's/i's), 
several mediaeval auihoiiiies (e.g. the 'Great' Bible of 1539: 'a portion 
with an heavy cheer'), and amongst moderns, Bo. Th. But for this 
sense of ^)^^ there is no support in the known usage of the language : 
D^SJtZ occurs with the meaning 'in anger' in Dan. 11, 20; but that 
would be unsuitable here, and the expressions ^OD 17DJ (Gen. 4, 6) and 
niy rh vn ab iTJD (below, v. 18) are not sufficient to justify the sense 
of a dejec/ed counien2ince being assigned to D''SN. It has been rendered 
(2) in connexion with rinx njD^ one poriiun of two faces ( = two persons), 
i.e. a double portion. So Keil and even Gesenius. It is true that the 
Syriac ^T corresponds generally in usage with the Hebrew D''J3 ; 
but, to say nothing of the fact that a Syriasm is unexpected in Samuel, 
and that even in late Hebrew D'SN does not occur with the Aramaic 
sense of 'person,' there is nothing in the use of the Syriac word to 
suggest that the dual would, in Hebrew, denote livo persons : ^Is/" 
(like D"'JD) is used of o?ie person, the singular not occurring. If C)^2>< 
means two persons, it must be implied that the singular fjx might 
denote ojie person, which the meaning of the word {nostril) obviously 
does not permit. Secondly, the construction, even if on lexical grounds 
this rendering were defensible, would be unexampled. Cax evidently 
cannot be a genitive after nriN HJO: Ew. § 287^ (cited by Keil) com- ' 
bines together cases of appobition and of the accusative of limitation ; 
but the disparity of idea {one portioji and two persons) shews that CDN 
cannot be in apposition with nnx nJD : it 7?iiglit be an accusative 
defining the amount or measure of the nriN njo {Tenses, App. § 194): 
but how unnaturally expressed ! ' one (emph.) portion,' immediately 
defined as a portion suitable for tzvo persons, i.e. as a double portion, 
as in fact not one portion at all, but two ! Upon grammatical grounds, 
hardly less decisively than upon lexical grounds, this rendering must 
thus be pronounced inadmissible. (3) The rendering of AV. a worthy 

8 The First Book of Samuel, 

portion is inherited from the Geneva Version of 1560, and is based 
ultimately upon the Targum, which has n^n2 nn p^n, i.e. 'one choice 
portion.! 'T'n3 choice corresponds in the Targum to the Hebrew CSN ; 
but it is clear that it is no translation of it, nor can it be derived from 
it by any intelligible process. Kimchi, in his Commentary and the 
Book ofRoois^ makes two attempts to account for it — both unsuccessful. 
Evidently it is a mere conjecture, designed to replace the untranslatable 
word by something that will more or less harmonize with the context. 

The Hebrew text does not admit of a defensible rendering. In the 
LXX D''ax is represented by ttXt^v, i.e. DDX. This reading at once 
relieves the difficulty of the verse, and affords a consistent and gram- 
matical sense. ''3 DDK restricts or qualifies the preceding clause, precisely 
as in Nu. 13, 28. 'But unto Hannah he used to give one portion:' 
this, following the portions of v. 4, might seem to imply that Elqanah 
felt less affection for her than for Peninnah. To obviate such a mis- 
conception, the writer adds: ' Howbeit he loved Hannah; but Yahweh 
had shut up her womb,' the last clause assigning the reason why 
Hannah received but one portion. This reading is followed by We., 
Stade {Gesch. des V. Isr. i. 199), Now., Kp., Kenn., Dhorme, and is 
rightly represented on the margin of R V. : the words because she had 
no child, however, though found in LXX, formed probably no part of 
the text used by the translators, but were added by them as an 
explanatory comment. 

6. Dy3 D3 . . . nnoyai] ' and . . . used to vex her even with a 
vexation,' i.e. vexed her bitterly, oys is not (as it is often rendered) 
to provoke to anger, but to vex, as Dy? is vexation : it always denotes 
the feeling aroused by some unmerited treatment; cf. Job 5, 2. 6, 2 ; 
Dt. 32, 19 the vexation caused to Yahweh by the undutiful behaviour 
of His 'sons and daughters,' 27 'vexation from the enemy,' i. e. 
the vexation which He would experience from their triumph at 
Israel's ruin. 

Dya] The abslr. subst., in place of the more common inf. abs., as 
Is. 21, 7 nt^'p 2''ti'pni ; comp. also 22, 17 will hurl thee as a man [<?r, 
O man] with a hurling, i.e. will hurl thee violently, 18 will wind thee 
up with a winding; 24, 16. 22 will be gathered, as captives, with a 
gathering [but read here 1^??<n ^DN] ; Ez. 25, 12. 15; 27, 35; Mic. 

/. 5-(> 9 

4, 9; Hab. 3, 9; Job 16, 14; 27, 12. d: occurs in the same 
position before the inf. abs. Gen. 31, 15. 46, 4. Nu. 16, i3t- Perhaps, 
indeed (EhrHch, Randghssen zur Hebr. Bibel, iii. (1910), p. 163), we 
should read here the inf., 0^3. 

nmv] 'her rival- ox fellow-wife :^ LXX (Luc.) 17 dvTt^r;Xos air^?, 
Vulg. aeniula eius, Pesh. cnl^iw. The meaning is certain. A com- 
parison of Hebrew with the cognate languages, Arabic and Syriac, 
shews that in old times, when polygamy was prevalent, a common 
term was in use among the Semitic peoples to denote the idea of a 
rival- or fellow-ivife, derived from a root JJ> to injure or vex, viz. 
Arabic ijj> darratwi = Syriac Jl^V. 'arthd = Hebrew niif. The 
variation in the initial letter shews that the term was not borrowed by 
one Semitic language from another, within historical times, but that it 
was already in use at the time when the common ancestors of the 
Hebrews, Aramaeans, and Arabs dwelt together in a common home : 
after the three branches separated, the initial consonant in process of 
time underwent a variation till it appeared finally as V in Hebrew, as 
^^ in Aramaic, and as (^ in Arabic ^ For an example of the Syriac 
word, see Ephrem Syrus, I. 65 D, where Hagar is spoken of as the 
jUiX of Sarah : it is also used here in Pesh. to represent m^. For 
the Arabic, see Lane's Arab. Lex., p. 1776, and 77^1? looi Nights 
(Habicht), iii. 276, 8 (cf. Lane's translation, London, 1865, ii. 135), 
referred to by Lagarde ('Budoor and Hayat-en-Nufoos are both 
wives of Qamar-ez-Zeman, and the one is i-i = m!f to the other : 
compare i Samuel i, 6 of the family of Elqanah ') ; Lane, Modern 
Egyptians, i. 232 ; S. A. Cook, The Laws of Moses and The Code of 
Hammurabi, p. 116 (who cites examples of the working of the system 
in Syria, and quotes the alliterative proverb, ed-durra juurra, 'A fellow- 
wife is bitter') : also Saadyah's version of Lev. 18, 18 (in Le Jay's or 

^ The variation is in accordance with rule : where Heb. 2f corresponds to 

Arab. ^ , its representative in Aramaic is >aw, V : e.g. JN2f = \X.j, = »-^, fV ; 

n? "" u^^ = "^^T, yi^ (it also, in the Aramaic of Jer. 10, 11 (NpIN), of 
Nineveh and Babylon, Zinjirli, Cappadocia, and Egypt, becomes p (as pJJ = 

y? = rJ^ ; "iJsp = -ipy = -^my. see zor.*, 1909, pp. 255, 504, 515; Cooke, 

NSI. p. 185). See Lagarde, Semitica, I. (1878), pp. 22-27, °^ ^^ ^'^t in the 
Appendix to the writer's Hebrew Tenses (ed. 3), § 178. 

lo The First Book of Samuel, 

Walton's Polyglott, or in Derenbourg's edition of his Works, vol. i, 
Paris, 1893) ^ "nvp in Lev. 18, 18 is a ' denominative ' (GK. § 38*:) 
from ms, as used here, having the sense of to take a rival- ox/ellow- 
wije (LXX yuvatKtt ctt' aSeXcjifj avTrj<; ov X-^^rj di'Ti^T|\oi/)"', just like the 
Arab. Ill '/X'^' In post-Biblical Hebrew mv occurs in the same 
sense in the Mishnah, Yebamoih, ch. i ^ 

n?oy^n] On the anomalous '=1 (with dagesh dirimens) see GK. § 22^ 
(20I1) ; Ew. § 28b {b) ; Stade, § 138a', The root Dyn elsewhere in Heb., 
except Ez. 27, 35 (where read probably with LXX, Pesh. DH^pQ ^VO^), 
means always to thunder (e.g. ch. 7, 10); but in Targ. it means in 
the Iihpaal to murmur^ complain (oft, for JI7, as Ex. 16, 2 "iJDj?"inx for 
1J1?''1) ; and in Syr. (besides meaning to thunder) the root, esp. in 
Ethpeal and Eihpael, and in its derivatives, is very frequent (see 
numerous examples in PS. s.v.) in the sense of be indignant, complain, 
and also lament (e.g. .ci-ia.N»ir JJ = ju,^ \aki.i:aiveTi.; o»-v:i.v!»l/ = 
rjyavdKTTjcrav ; and )>.v>.No> = fxofxtftTJ, Col. 3, 1 3). The Hif. may be 
rendered here to irritate her. 

The Arab. ^, (which is usually a denom. from lie' earth or dust, 
and is used of the nose cleaving to the dust, fig. of abasement) has also 
the sense of /^ anger (conjj. i and iv; cf. iii and v: Lane, Arab. Lex., 
II 13 f.). It is possible that, in this sense, it is allied with the Aram. 
Dyi mentioned above, and with the Heb. D^yin here. 

7. riK'j?''] Difficult. Keil: 'So used he (Elqanah) to do (viz. gave 

1 ' And a woman with her sister thou shalt not take L^i ,15 JjoX-uJ that she may 
be her fellow-zvife.' 

^ Keil's rendering of Tl2?7, derived from Knobel, is not probable. 

^ See further on this word Lagarde, in his essay Whettier Marriage wilh a 
Deceased Wife's Sister is, or is not, prohibited in the Mosaic Writings, published 
originally in the Gottingen Nachrichten, 1882, No. 13, and reprinted in the volume 
entitled MittJieilungen i. (1884), pp. 125-134. Substantially the word was already 
correctly explained by Alb. Schultens in his Consesstis Haririi quartus qidntus et 
sextus (Lugd. Bat. 1740)) P- 77 • 'Sub .^ regnat speciatim usus obtrcctandi et 
aeinulandi, contoidendi ex Zelotypia, <\\xsiQ \ocdit\XT *|',j et ^. Hinc ij ".J 'Tl^ 
est midier quae cum alia cotnmunein habet maritum. Sic i Sam. 1,6:' and he 

quotes the phrase ij^ V^ cj>s^-' ductafuit super aemulatione, i.e. alleri uxori 
fuit adiiincta, and refers also to "lllifb in Lev. 18, 18. (Similarly in the 
Aniviadvcrsiones Fhilologicae et Crilicae ad varia loca V. T. (1709), on this 
passage : reprinted in the Opera Minora, 1769, p. 166.) 

/. 6-g II 

her a double portion), . . . ; so used she to vex her,' i.e. the more he 
shewed his affection for Hannah, the more Peninnah vexed her : but, 
even apart from the untenable expl. 'double portion,' there is no 
analogy for this sense of the repeated p: 'the more . . . the more' 
is p . . . '^\^)^'2 (Ex. I, 12). Th. We. point nbr 'so was it done year 
by year . . . , so (namely) did she vex her : ' but this use of the passive 
HB'VJ is hardly a Hebrew idiom. Probably we should read with Pesh. 
(loo» )tn^), Vulg. (implicitly), nij'Jjri pi < and so «ji?</ j-^^ (Peninnah) 
to do year by year . . . , so (namely) used she to vex her : ' in this case 
the second p is simply resumptive of the first. 

nrja nac^] yearycr year, i.e. one year like another = yearly. So 
elsewhere, as i Ki. 10, 25. See Lex, p. gC^. 

^■jip] lit. out of the sufficiency of, idiom, for as often as : see Lex. 191^. 

nn^y] Read probably with Vulg. DnSj?. 

miT' n''33] After the verb of motion, we expect the accus. nin'' JT"!, 
which is probably to be read with 34 IMSS., Kimchi, and three Rabb. 
authorities ap. Aptowitzer, I (see List of Abbreviations), p. 37. 

nnani] Instead of continuing, by '"'C'r'jJI, to describe what took place 
every year, the narrator, by using the hist, tense n32ni, glides here into 
the description of what happened in the particular year referred to 
in V. 4''. 

^2Xn N^l] I^Iore significant than the normal "> n?3N* NPI would have 
been, and emphasizing the continual condition in which Hannah was : 
see Tenses, §§ 30, 42 /?, 85 Obs.; GK. § 107®. So ns^D v. 10''. 

8. iiop] So pointed only in this verse (thrice): GK. § 102^; Lex. 
554^. Comp. the cases in which HD is pointed anomalously HO (Stade, 
§ 173 c^); and for the tone Mil' el the anomalous '"ID? Job 7, 20. 

na^ yT"] So Dt. 15, 10 : cf. the y-| 3^ {sad heart) of Pr. 25, 20, and 
the opposite 210 said of the heart ch. 25, 36 (where see note): also 
D^yn CJa (Gen. 40, 7), said in Neh. 2, 2 to be due to 37 yn. LXX 
TuVret o-e for yi.''., i.e. 'H?-, but unsuitably (see 24, 6. H 24, 10). 

9. H^JDn] The inf. cstr. with the fern, termination, as regularly with 
nxnS nnnx, and with this word in Jer. 12, 9, the Priests' Code, and 
Ezekiel; also sporadically with other words' (cf. inyiOt^'a Is. 30, 19; 

1 "itt Journal of Philology, XI. (1S82), 235 f. ; GK. § 45'' 

12 The First Book of Samuel, 

r\\>1'h Dt. II, 22): and with the suffix omitted, as also takes place 
exceptionally (e.g. ch. 18, 19. Gen. 24, 30. i Ki. 20, 12). 0^3^ (so 
LXX) is, however, what would be naturally expected — the suffix referring 
to the party generally, in spite of Hannah's not joining with them. 
xh^l is, however, in fact superfluous, as the entire incident takes 
place at Shiloh : perhaps (We.) nbc'3n the boiled flesh (cf. 2, 15), or 
(Kittel) n3^p3 (see on v. 18), should be read. Klo., in view of z'. 18 
LXX, for rh^'y rhy^ nnx, emends very cleverly n3K'?3 npss nsril, 
'and left her food (uneaten) in the (dining-)chamber ' (see 9, 22), — 
followed by (see below), 'and stood before Yahweh.' This emendation 
is accepted by Bu., but not by Sm. Now.; see further on v. 18. 

nh^J Very anomalous (cf. GK. § ii3e«.), being the only example 
of an inf. abs. after a preposition*: contrast i Ki. 13, 23 i^^^? ''"'nN 
^nin^ nnN^ On^. LXX do not express nriB' nnxi ; and it may well 
be an addition to n^3X nriN, made on the analogy of other passages 
in which nntJ' follows ^DN (e.g. Gen. 24, 54). LXX have, however, 
after \Vt':^ koI KareW?; iviairiov KvpLov, i.e. """' ''32? ^rnn^ (of V. 26. 
10, 19), which is indeed required for the sequel, and is accepted by 
Th. We. Klo. etc. 

25?'''] The ptcp. describes what Eli zvas doing at the time when 
Hannah appeared where he was. 

nnro ^y] bv = by- Lex. 756*. 

10. tJ'S: mio] Cf. 2 Ki. 4, 27 n^ mo n^i'SJI: Job 3, 20. 27, 2 al. 
The expression implies a state of mental embitterment, i.e. disappoint- 
ment, dissatisfaction, discontent (Jud. 18, 25. ch. 22, 5). 

i^y] for the more usual 7N, which is read here by several MSS. 
There is a tendency, however, in these two books to use 7y and ?N 
interchangeably: comp. v. 13. 2, 11. II 19, -13 : also i Ki. 9, 5^. 20, 43. 
Is. 22, 15; and see on 13, 13. Cf. Lex. 41*. 

11. ilNin nx"! Dn] The expression of a condition is often emphasized 
by the addition of the inf. abs.: see on 20, 6; and exactly as here. 

^ The inf. abs. occurs, however, though even then rarely, as the object of another 
verb (Ew. § 240*; GK. § Ii3''). — Ewald, in his explanation of this passage 
(§ 339'')> appears to have read il^JN (as some MSS. and Edd. do read [see the 
note in Michaelis], though against the Massorah). On Ex. 32, 6, which might be 
thought, perhaps, to afford a parallel to the text, see the note on 22, 13. 

/. g-I) 13 

Nu. 2 1, 2. For ""jy in a similar connexion, cf. Gen. 29, 32; and for 
nar (also V. 19^), Gen, 30, 22. 

'JDian] The pf. with waw conv. carrying on the impf, nxiD, 
according to Tenses, § 115 s.v. DX. So Ex. 19, $^. 23, 22aetc. 

vnnJl] Here the pf. with waw conv. marks the apodosis : ib. § 136 a. 
So 20, 6; Ex. 19, 5^. 23, 22b etc. 

Vn ''D'' ?3 ^"v VnnJl] LXX has Kai Swaaj avTov ivwinov (rov Sorov 
cws rifjbepa<; Oavdrov aurovi* koX olvov koX ixiOvcr/xa ov TrUrai. This is 
probably an amplification of the Hebrew text, by means of elements 
borrowed from Nu. 3, 9. 18, 6. 6, 3 (all P), designed with the view of 
representing Samuel's dedication as more complete. 

12. iTni] As a frequentative sense is here out of place, this must be 
the perf. with simple waw, in place of the normal ''i})\, such as is met 
with occasionally, as 10, 9. 13, 22. 17, 48. 25, 20 (see note). II 6, 16 
(see note); and with other verbs 3, 13 (but see note). 4, 19. 17, 38. 
II 7, 11^. 13, 18 (^yJI, as Jud. 3, 23). 16, 5. 23, 20 (and more fre- 
quently in later Hebrew): see Tenses, § 133. We. Bu. and others 
would correct n^ni always to "'H^l. This may seem violent: but it is 
observable that in almost every case future tenses precede, so that 
a scribe might, even more than once, have written riMI by error, 
supposing inadvertently that the future verbs were to continue. Cf. 
the discussions in Tenses, I.e.; GK. § ii2PP~"'^; Kon. iii. § 370c-''. 

PPDnn? nniin] lit. did much in respect of praying, i. e. prayed long 
or much: cf. Is. 55, 7 nibo? n3T "'3=for he will abundantly pardon, 
II 14, 1 1. Ex. 36, 5. >//•. 78, 38. So blNcl? n"':i'pn thou hast done hardly 
in r^j/)^(r/^ asking = thou hast asked a hard thing 2 Ki. 2, 10; 333n'' 
N13? = come in stealthily II 19, 4; rnab nN3n3 = fled secretly Gen. 
31, 27 ; r\'^ nisrn S*^ = shall not comeback i Ki. 13, 17; nixn^ n20M 
Jer. I, 12; m37 TlDTp I was beforehand in fleeing = I fled betimes 
Jon. 4, 2 : GK. § 114° with the footnote. 

12-13. • • • fl^^lJ^ K^n n:m . , , nob' ^i^yi] Two circumstantial 
clauses {Tenses, § 160), n\Ti being resumed by ^3t^•^''1 in 13'^. "IDK^ has 
here the sense of observed, i.e. marked — not a common use of ICt^, at 
least in prose: comp. i/^. 17, 4. Job 39, i. Zech. 11, 11. 

13. km] For the pron. (which is unusual, as thus joined with the 
indef ptcp.) cf. Dt. 31, 3. Jos. 22, 22 : Tenses, § 199 note. 

14 The First Book of Samuel, 

n37 by mmo] not, of course, as Is. 40, 2 al. in the sense of con- 
solhig, but, the pron. being reflexive, as la^ f'X -\yh in Gen. 24, 45 = 
to speak io oneself (where LXX likewise render by eV, so that there is 
no ground for changing here hv into 3). Comp. 13^ h^ nON"'1 (followed 
of course— the verb being nON— by the words supposed to be said) 
27, I. Gen. 8, 21 (We.). It is another instance of ^y=ijx. 

VQ^^ VO] not V'Qf'^ NP, in agreement with the continuance expressed 
by the preceding ptcp. riiyj. 

'b ntJ'n] as Gen. 38, 15. Job 33, 10 al. 

14- piant^n] the J of the 2 fern, sing., retained regularly in Aramaic 
and Arabic, is found in Hebrew only seven times, viz. here, Jer. 31, 22. 
Is. 45, 10. Ruth 2, 8. 21. 3, 4. 18 (Stade, § 553; GK. § 470). 

*]vyo] /ro7n upon thee — the wine (in its effects) being conceived as 
clinging to her, and weighing her down. Comp. for the idiom (applied 
literally) 17, 39. Gen. 38, 19 al., and (metaphorically) Am. 5, 23: 
also Jud. 16, 19 vi^yo YO nD''1 (in allusion to the hair as the seat of 
Samson's strength). 

15. nn nc*p] The expression occurs only here: upon the analogy 
of 37 ■'K'i? Ez. 3, 7 (cf. Dt. 2, 30) it would denote hard-spirited, i.e. 
obstinate, unyielding. LXX y] o-Kkrjpa r\ii.ipa, i.e. Di'' HK'p^ which is 
supported by Job 30, 25, where nv '•tJ'p is used in the sense which 
is here desiderated, viz. tmfortunate, lit. hard of day, i. e. one upon whom 
times are hard (cf, Svcrrj/jiepLa). So Th. We. Hitzig (on Job Lc), etc. 

••SJN] mil'el {Tenses, § 91), the pausal form of ""SiN, here with a minor 
disjunctive accent {zaqef^, such as often induces a pausal form {Tenses, 
§ 103)- 

'•{J'Si] i.e. the emotions and desire, of which in Hebrew psychology 
the 'soul' is the seat: cf. y^r. 42, 5; also 102, i. 142, 3, which illus- 
trate at the same time '•'T'B' v. 1 6. See the synopsis of passages in the 
writer's Parallel Psalter, p. 459 f. 

16. hv'hi-ni ""JS^] 6 jnj means to make into, '3 fn: to treat as 
(Gen. 42, 30. i/r. 44, 12): ^J2^ jn3 means elsewhere to set before (i Ki. 
9, 6) or to give up before (Dt. 2, 31. 33) — neither sense, however, being 
suitable here. If the text be correct, ''J2^ must have the force of like, 
which it also appears to possess in Job 3, 24 (parallel with d). 4, 19 
(Ew. Del. Hitz.) ; but in these passages also the sense is questionable. 

/. ij-i8 15 

LXX express simply 7y^73"n37 ; but '? jriJ never occurs in the sense of 
to represent as. The best suggestion seems to be to read '2 ri33, . ,|nn"?N 
treat not . . . as (Gen. 42, 30), throwing out ''JS?, as having come in by 
error from the line above (Sm. Bu,). On ?yv3, see Lex. s.v. 

"mm] LXX iKTeraKa, Targ. JT'^niN, — both paraphrasing. 
. 17. '^npC'] for ^ripNip (unusual), GK. § 2 3f Here begins a series of 
plays (ij 17. 20. 27. 28. 2, 20) by which the stem 7N5J' is brought into 
connexion with the name Samuel. Cf. Gen. 17, 17. 18, 12. 13. 15. 
21, 6 (Isaac); 25, 26. 27, 36 (Jacob). 

loyjo] Dyo is idiomatic with !?N"^: v. 27. Dt. 10, 12. Is. 7, 11 al. 
{Lex. 768b 3(7//<??«). Cf. nxx? I Ki. 2, 16 Tirixo bm ^aix nns nbxf. 

18. n3*ll?] LXX adds koI ila-rjXOev eh to KaTaXvfjia avrrjs, i.e. no 
doubt, as We. rightly perceived, nnitJ'pn N3ril (see 9, 22) 'and entered 
into the (dining-)chamber ' — LXX having incorrectly treated the n 
tocak as the suffix of the 3 pers. sing. fem. The n^C^b was a chamber 
near the nin'' byn, as in 9, 22 near the naa, in which the sacrificial 
meals were held. In later times the word denotes the chambers in the 
Temple Court in which the priests lived: Jer. 35, 2. 4. Ez. 40, 17 etc. 

73Nni] LXX for this has an entire sentence, presupposing the Heb. 
n^ril n^"X Oy b^Xril nnifbu Nbril. if these words are original,— 
and they certainly read as if they were, — Hannah leaves the sacred 
meal {v. 9) 6e/ore it is over, and goes to the temple to pray : she then 
returns to the dining-chamber, and finishes her meal with her husband. 
Klo.'s emend, of v. 9 agrees with this representation. Would the 
narrator, however, have said, ' and went her way,' if he had pictured 
her merely as returning to the adjoining nac'i? (Sm.) ? If the additional 
words in LXX here are not original, then 73Nni will mean ' and ate ' in 
general; and with this will agree MT. of v. 9, according to which 
Hannah leaves the n^U? after the sacred meal is finished. Klo.'s emend, 
of V. 9 is brilliant, and attractive : but it is difficult to be as confident that 
it is right, as Bu. is. Nowack and Smith do not accept either it, or the 
LXX reading here. 

73Nm] milrd, on account of the disjunctive accent, zaqef: out of 
pause, we have ^3Xni {Tnil'el); so e.g. Lev. 10, 2. See GK. § 68'1'e. 

■T'ja] D''Ja of a vexed or discontented countenance, as Job 9, 27 
na^^ns^l "as n^.'Wi^ ^n^^ nnaj^'N n»N DN. LXX understood the word 

l6 The First Book of Samuel, 

in its ordinary sense, reading (or paraphrasing) "nV ^?S3 N? iTJSI (cf. 
Gen. 4, 6). Klo. nb^an N^ (Jer. 3, 12) for rh Vn N^. 

20. It is doubtful if the text is in its original form. We should 
expect (cf. Gen. 30, 22 f.) the 'remembering' to be followed imme- 
diately by the conception, and the date which, in the text as it stands, 
fixes the time of the conception, to fix rather the time of the birth. 
Hence Reifmann {Or Boqer, Berlin, 1879, p. 28) supposes a trans- 
position to have taken place, and would restore the words run "inni to 
the beginning of the verse : ' And Hannah conceived ; and it came 
to pass, at the close of the year, that she bare a son.' So in 
effect LXX (kuI avviXafBev, KoX iyevijOr} tw Kaipw twv rjfjiepwv kol 
Itckev v'lov), but without the retention of njn, which is desiderated by 
Hebrew style (inm alone being too light by the side of the long clause 

D''D^^ nisipnb] Read, with 6 MSS., nsipnb (the pi. is strange; and 
the 1 would form no part of the original text : Introd. § 2. 2), a/ the 
(completed) circuit of the days, i. e. not (as Th. We.) at the end of the 
period of gestation, but like HJE^Tl DDIpD Ex. 34, 22 { = T\':i'^r\ nNV3 in 
the parallel, Ex. 23, 16), of the Feast of Ingathering at the close of 
the year, which was no doubt the occasion of the pilgrimage alluded 
to in V. 21. Cf. the cogn. sipj in Is. 29, i 12pJ'' CJn 'let the feasts ^0 
round^ i.e. complete their circuit. CCii as z^r^. 3. 21. 7 of time as 

II II, I. I Ki. 20, 22. 26. 2 Ch. 24, 23 rwT\ nsipn?. naipn occurs 

besides only i/f. 19, 7. 

?X1D6^] The current etymologies of this name cannot be accepted. 
This is evident at once in the case of the old derivation, which still 
lingers in the margin of AV., ' that is, Asked of God,' as if ?X^n^ were 
contracted from ?ND piNB' ; for such a contraction would be altogether 
alien to the genius of the Hebrew language. What the writer means 
to express must be (as often in the OT.) an assonance, not an ety- 
mology, i. e. the name 7NlDt^ recalled to his mind the word ^NtJ^ asked, 
though in no sense derived from it. So |^p or H^O, for instance, 
recalled or suggested the verbs HJp to get, and TWt2 to draw out, though 
the names do not themselves signify either ' gotten ' or ' drawn out.' 
What, however, is the actual meaning of the name i^NlOB^ ? When the 
explanation ' Asked of God ' was seen to be untenable, an attempt was 

/. 20 17 

made to bring the name into some sort of connexion with the text by 
the suggestion that it was = ^^jyi^^, and signified ' heard of God ' 
(so e.g. Keil). Had this, however, been the writer's intention, we 
should have expected the word hear to occur somewhere in the narra- 
tive, which is not the case. But there are even more serious objections 
to this derivation, (i) Had this been the true account of the name, 
the N rather than the J? would have been naturally the letter elided : an 
original 7^Vyt^^ would have given rise to bsj^lDB' (on the analogy of 
bxyiOK'^) rather than to bxiDtJ'i. (2) Compound proper names in 
Hebrew are constructed, for the most part, after particular types or 
models : thus one large class consists of one of the sacred names 
followed by a verb in the perfect tense (the last vowel only being 
lengthened, after the analogy of substantives), as \T}i?^, I^Ji'"^ ^^^r?, 
y'JJ^'"'!, i.e. El {ox Fah) has given, El (or Vah) has known. Another 
class is similarly compounded, but the verb stands first, as (1)n^??n, 
^^W„ Yah (or El) has been gracious, (l)nf-in?, ^NHiy, Yah (or El) has 
helped. In a third (less numerous) class the verb still stands first, but 
is in the imperfect tense, as ?N^ni^ El hath mercy (or, with an optative 
force, May El have mercy !), ('l)nj31X^ Vah hearkeneth (or, May Yah 
hearken!). There are, of course, other types, which need not however 
h^ here considered. But numerous as are the proper names com- 
pounded of one of the sacred names and a verb, there are none, or next 
to none, compounded zuith a passive participle. Obvious as such a form 
as blessed or helped or redeemed 0/ Vah might appear to be, it was 
uniformly discarded by the Hebrews. In proper names, the passive 
participle is used only by itself. We have ^1"i3 and "1^3!^ for instance, 
but ^X313 or ^nj3nn>, not n;3^-i3; iniv, nnTJ)« or (^)nj"i?|, not n;n!inT; 
we have not only iriJ^NI and jrijin^ (or iriJi''), but also (1)n53nj and ^5?;"?, 
not however bwn3 ; we have (^)^)'^^f and ^Nj;m^ (also VO?''S>!), but 
not i'NyiOC'. There is 710 name in the OT. formed analogously to 
a presumable ^NyittK' heard o/God'^; and the fact that this type of 

1 In ^^TT. I Ch. 7, 6 al. even the X is not elided. 

' The only possible exception would be ?Si'''inp Gen. 4, 18, if this mean 
' smitten of God,' which, however, is far from certain : following the Qre, we may- 
vocalize ?X;"'^np, which would agree with the LXX TAaiijX, i.e. 'God is a life- 
giver' (Budde, Biblische Urgeschichte, p. 128). But, in any case, an archaic 

1365 C 

i8 The First Book of Samuel, 

compound name was studiously avoided by the Hebrews is practically 
conclusive against the proposed derivation. 

The derivation suggested by Gesenius, bxTOE' = ' Name of God,' 
is as obvious as it is natural. It is suitable and appropriate in itself; 
and the form of compound which it implies is in exact agreement with 
bxi3S ' Face of God,' ^Niiyn ' Friend of God,' ^XIW ' Majesty of God.' 
The u is the old termination of the nominative case (see GK. § 90 k), 
retained as a binding-vowel, both in the instances cited, and also occa- 
sionally besides : e. g. in vh&T^'O ' Man of the weapon V and ^NK'^DD a 
' Man who belongs to God.' 

The preceding argument, on its negative side, that t'NIOtJ' does not mean 
' Heard of God,' has been generally allowed to be conclusive : but it has been felt 
by some that ' Name of God ' does not yield a good sense for the name of a person ; 
and other explanations of it have been proposed. 

I. /NlfOC it has been pointed out, resembles in form certain South Arabian 
proper names of the type Stimhu apika, ' His name is mighty,' Suvihu-yadda, ' His 
name has determined,' Sttinhu-kariba, ' His name has blessed,' Sumhu-watara, 
'His name is pre-eminent' [Heb. "ID''], etc. : the names of two of the kings of the 
first Babylonian dynasty, c. 2100 B.C. (of South Arabian origin), Shwiiu-abi, S/iumu- 
la-ilii, have been also explained similarly, viz. {Shtimu being regarded as a con- 
traction of Shumu-hu) 'His name is my father,' *Is not his name God?' 
Hommel, who first called attention to these resemblances {Afic. Heb. Trad., 1S97, 
85 f., 99 f.), interpreted these names in a monotheistic sense, and understood ' His 
name ' to be a periphrasis for ' God ; ' but Giesebrecht , who discussed the subject, 
and compared many names of similar formation, such as Ili-kariba, Abi-kariba, 
{Die ATliche Schdtzung des Gottesnamens, 1901, pp. 103-I13, 140-144), regards 
it, with much greater probability, as a periphrasis for the name of a god whom the 
giver of the name for some reason shrinks from mentioning. The same view of 
the Bab. names is taken by Winckler and Zimmem (see KAT.^, pp. 225, 483 f., 
with the references). And all these scholars regard bXIDiJ' as formed similarly, 
and as meaning 'His name is God,' i.e. (Giesebrecht, pp. 108 f., 112 f.) the 

name such as this has no appreciable bearing upon the usage of the language in 
historic times. With active participles, there occur the compounds (1')n^?22K'D 
I Ch. 9, 21. 26, 1. 2. 9; and the Aramaic PNDVB'P 'God is a deliverer' Neh. 
3, 4 al., and pSlZl^'iip 'God is a benefactor' Neh. 6, 10 (in Gen. 36, 39 the 
name borne by the wife of an Edomite king). 

* Though more probably TvP^ conceals the name of some Babylonian deity : 
see conjectures in Skinner's Genesis, p. 133; and the writers Genesis, p. 81. 

* The t^ marks this word as a jS'af^j/iiiw/aw formation: cf. ^NK'^l^. flD in the 
special sense husband is common in Ethiopic : in Hebrew, as a living language, it 
fell out of use, except in the plural. 

/, 20-21 


name of the god in qnestion (here nin"") is itself a Divine manifestation, and 
possesses a Divine force and pov^er (of. Ex. 23, 21 13'lp3 "'lOK' ""a), capable of 
helping and protecting the child who bears it (cf. the use of UV in \p. 20, 2. 
54, 3. Prov. 18, 10: see further on this subject BB. v. 640 f.). 

2. In Heb., as in other Semitic languages, it seems that long names were in 
familiar use sometimes abbreviated, and that in this way, ' hypocoristic,' ' carita- 
tive,' or pet names arose. Thus names of the form '2W^ (from iT'^K'n), y^T 
(from njyT), DI^K' (from T\11^V}), yiS^ (from \V)i12^), to judge from modern 
Arabic names of the same form, and with the same force, are caritatives : there 
are also other types (Lidzbarski, ' Semitische Kosenamen,' in his Ephe7?ieris, 
ii. 1-23 : see p. 21). Pratorius, now {ZDMG. 1903, 773 ff.), considers that these 
names were originally passive participles (as y^T* ' known,' short for ' [He whom] 
Yah knows'), though afterwards phonetically modified, when it was felt that they 
were not really participles, but proper names. And Pratorius would extend this 
principle to the explanation of pNIDtJ', and of some other names of the same 
type : he would regard pSIDC viz. as an abridged caritative of bsyOK'^, formed 
from the ptcp. yiDB', with loss of the final letter, but with preservation of the 
Divine name ; and he would explain similarly bN^QH (i Ch, 4, 26) as for PNI^ICn 
from i?&{^0^^ ^NinS (Joel i, 1) = W niDQ from ^X-nriS^ ; ^N1J2 = Sx "•^JQ 
from bx-n3D^ [cf. KaS^] ; i?X1X3 = Sx^JlXa from ^JxW (p. 777 ff.)- This 
explanation is, however, purely conjectural : we do not know that any of these 
names were really formed by the process assumed. 

3. Jastrow {JBLii. 1900, p. 103 f.), observing that in Ass. shiimn, properly 
name, is often virtually equivalent to offspring, esp. in proper names, as N'abii- 
shum-ukin, ' Nabu has established an offspring,' Bel-slmm-tisur, ' O Bel, protect 
the offspring ' (cf. DB' in Heb. in such expressions as cu( off ox wipe otit the name. 
Is. 14, 22. Dt. 7, 24, establish the name, 2 S. 14, 7 — though of course in these 
expressions D^ does not meati 'offspring'), supposes the meaning of bXIJ^tJ' 
to be son of God, and that it is the correlative of bN''2N ' My father is God.' 
But would D5J' express this sense, except in a connexion which shewed that the 
* name ' was thought of as attached to, and perpetuated by, the offspring ? 

It may be doubted whether the objections to the explanation, ' Name of God,' 
are cogent. A name, unless there are good reasons for supposing it to have passed 
through considerable phonetic change, surely means what to all appearance it 
seems to mean. The obvious meaning of ?X1?i{J' is 'Name of God.' This may 
very naturally have been understood to mean ' Bearing the name of God : ' cf. 
Noldeke, EB. Names, § 39, who compares ' h.TioK\(uvvyi.os^ 'EKaruvvi^os = Named 
after Apollo, Named after Hecate. 

"•3] For the omission of saying cf. Gen. 4, 25. 32, 31. 41, 51. 52; 
Ex. 18, 4. 

vn^x^i*] GK. §§ 44d 64f So v. 28 in^n^Ntrn. 

21. B^'sn] Used similarly Gen. 19, 9. Ex. 11, 3. Nu. 12, 3. Jud. 
17, 5. I Ki. II, 28. Est. 9, 4. 

c 2 

20 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

D'^NT nnr] ^'&\t yearly sacrifice;' see on i, 3. So 2, 19: also 20, 6 
of an annual family festival. 

22. 'y\ ny] Cf. Jos. 6, 10. Jud. 16, 2 : also 11 10, 5 {Tenses, § 115 
s.v. ny). 

"•JS nx] = ?'« the presence of, as 2, 11. 17. 18; ^/^. 16, 10. 21, 7. 
140, 14; Lev. 4, 6. 17 {in front o/" the veil). Perhaps, however, the 
original reading was HST for nxi3, in which case nx would be the 
ordinary sign of the accusative: see the writer's note on Ex. 23, 15, 
or Dt. 16, 16, Cheyne on Is. i, 12, Kirkpatrick on i/^. 42, 2 [Heb. 3]. 

23. "nm nx] LXX, Pesh. express the second person "^"?.?'^"^^— in 
all probability, rightly. There has been no mention in the preceding 
verses of any word or promise on the part of God : and even in so far 
as it may be supposed to be involved in the wish expressed by Eli in 
V. 1 7, that has been fulfilled already in the birth of the child. 'Establish 
thy word,' i.e. give it effect, permit it to be carried out. im D''pn is 
used especially of a person carrying out a command or injunction laid 
upon him, as 15, 13. Jer. 35, 16; or of Yahweh giving effect to 
His own, or His prophet's, word, as i Ki. 12, 15. Is. 44, 26. Jer. 33, 
14. LXX, rendering ro i^eXOov Ik tot) orro/Aaros crov, use the more 
formal expression : see Nu. 30, 13 rTTlStJ* NV1D ?D. 32, 24 N^'Vm 
"Itryn Cy^^. Dt. 23, 24 ; also Dt. 8, 3. Jer. 17, 16. 

24. ntr^C' OnM] LXX iv /xoo-xw rpuTii^ovTi, Pesh. )k^ol )»ol^ 
= K'?K'0 "1D3 (see Gen. 15, 9): no doubt correctly, for (i) the order 
nL'6c* CIS is very unusuaP: (2) only one nD is spoken of in v. 25. 
The change is really only one in the grouping of letters : for in the 
older orthography D'''nD would be written regularly JDID (without 1, and 
without the distinctive final form of the ^ : cf. on the Siloam Inscription 
?D3Vnn = Cn^nn : there are also many indications that the plena 
scriptio was not in use in the MSS. used by the LXX translators. See 
further in the Introduction), For nnx with 07ie term only of the 

^ It is, however, doubtful whether this argument should be here pressed : in 
a list oi different things, the substantives may stand first for emphasis (GK. § 134") : 
cf Gen. 32, 15 f. (JE), Nu. 7, 17. 23 etc. (P). (In the footnote to GK. § 134", 
1. 5, there is an oversight : 'nearly always afler' should be 'more often after : ' 
Hemer, op. cit., pp. 58-59, gives more than three pages of instances in P with the 
numeral before the subst., and hardly half a page of cases with it after !) 

/. 21-28 21 

enumeration cf. i6, 20. LXX add after ti'PCD 122 koX apT06s = Dn?1 — 
probably (We.) from Ex. 29, 23f. 

nop] may be either in appos. to nnx HD'^N, or an accus. of limita- 
tion : see Tenses, § 194; and cf. GK. § 131'^' p. So Gen. 18, 6 t:*?^ 
npi7 D^ND. Ex. 16, 32 |o loyn x!?n, etc. 

I^c] The correction ibK*! is unnecessary: the accus. is under 
the influence of in^nni: cf. v. 19. lo, 26. 15, 34. II 20, 3. Jos. 9, 6. 
10, 15. 43. 18, 9b. Jud. 9, 5. 21, 12b. 

nyj lyjni] AV. RV. 'and the child was young.' But this rendering 
implies that "lyj as predicate expresses more than it does as subject, 
which cannot be the case. The words can only be rendered ' and the 
lad was a lad.' It is just possible that this might be understood — in 
accordance with the Semitic usage explained on 23, 13 — as meaning 
' the lad was what he was — there is no occasion to say more about 
him : ' but the case is barely parallel to the other examples of the 
usage ; and this fact about Samuel would be so obvious from the 
narrative in general that it would scarcely deserve to be made the 
subject of a special remark. It is more probable that the text is in 
error. LXX express D^V ''^^'"'1: but this is tautologous, following 
24a MT. It is best to read with Klo. Bu. (LXX eicryXOev) i^^^\ 
may -lyjni i^B'p] nin'' n^n. 

25. lonci] The subject is not Hannah and Elqanah, but Q''£?nE'L' 
(We.) : see on 16, 4. 

1N''2''l] viz. D''S''3»n (see the last note), the attendants of the temple, 
perhaps the same as D^DnCTl. Or we might read either with LXX 
N3ri1 ' came zai/Zi,' or X?'^! 'brought.' 

26. ''2] LXX here and Jud. 6, 13. 15. 13, 8, i Ki. 3, 17. 26 render 
unintelligibly by 'Ev e'/xot, elsewhere (Pent. Jos.) correctly by 4eo/xat, 
Aeo/A€^a. On this precative ■*? (Gen. 43, 20 al.), see Lex. io6b. 

IK'SJ >n] See on 17, 55. 

n3Dy] merely an orthographical variation for ^isy (here only) : so 
n3b3 Ex. 15, II di'sf; n^m Nu. 22, 33; nanx Ex. 29, 351; '"i?? Ex. 
7, 29. II 22, 30. if/. 141, 8t; "1?.^ Gen. 27, 37. II 18, 22. Is. 3, 6t. 

^n] wM re/e fence /o, regarding {noi/or); as Is. 37, 21. 33. 

28a. t^jx Dji] 'et ego vicissim, Job 7, 11' (Th. from Le Clerc), cf. 
cA. 28, 22 : II 12, 13. The so-called 'D3 correlativum^ {Lex. 169b 4.) 

22 The First Book of Samuel, 

^^^ . . . ninv] The first of the two zdqefs always marks the greater 
break (GK. § 15™), as indeed the sense frequently shews; comp. 2, 14. 

ni.T'i' liTn^XCn] h^)X^T\ is to let a person ask (viz. successfully), i. e. to 
grant him his request ; lit., therefore, ' let (one) ask him for Y.' = let 
him be asked for (lent him to) Y. So Ex. 12, 36 (the correlative of 
ask in 3, 22. II, 2, as of the same word here in vv, 17. 27 ; for 7NC> 
ask in the sense of borrow, se^ also Ex. 22, 13. 2 Ki. 4, 3 ^). In the 
cognate languages, however, the word by usage acquires definitely the 
sense of lend: see Luke n, 5 Pesh., where >« 1 ^.'^jkiL^'^ stands for 
the Greek yjn\(T6v fxot '^. 

'Jl D"'»M-^3] 'all the days for which he shall be (Vulg. /uen'l ; the 
fut. perf., as Gen. 48, 6 : Tenses, § 17 ; GK. § 1060), he is granted to 
(lit. asked for) Yahweh.' It is probable that for HM we should read, 
with LXX, Pesh. Targ. (though these, as AY., may indeed merely 
paraphrase), ''D (cf. Gen. 5, 5) ; but in any case Nin is to be construed 
with what follows, not (as by LXX) with what precedes. 

niiT'^ ^1S'^] asked {borrowed) /or (= lent to) Yahweh : cf. 2 Ki. 6, 5 
bia^ Nini (= borrowed) ^ 

2 8^\ The last words o^v. 28 must be dealt with in connexion with 2, 
1 1 a. LXX do not express i, 28^; on the other hand they have in 
2, II* (/cat KareAtTrev avTov eK€t ivwiriov K.vpiov, kol dTrrjXOiv ets 
ApixadaLjx) an addition to MT., which looks like a various recension 
of the words not expressed by them in i, 28^. The two texts may be 
compared, by placing one above the other, as is done by We. : 
MT. irT'D-^y nnnin mpi?N i^'^i T\^T\'h n^ inntrM 

LXX nnjD-in -i^rii nin^ '•paj? D:i> ^^^^^\ 

In the light of the context, LXX deserves the preference. For in 

^ As Bu. aptly remarks, PNtJ* and ^''i^tJ'n are to borrow and leitd, as a trans- 
action between friends, PiY? and nipH are to borrow and lend in a commercial 

2 Cf. Sir. 46, 13 Heb. (the clause is not in the Greek text) ^XIB'On (rd. the 
Hof. ptep. i)K'J"lOn) 1»K pyO: Syr. o»iol» \ai-^ ^ "SJilt^h. ^. 

* Jastrow {JBLit. xix, 1900, p. 100) supposes ^''Nti'n to be a denominative 
from ^NJ}' asker (viz. of the Divine will, — a function of the priest), and would 
render accordingly, 'have made him an asker (^priest) to Yahweli :' but though 
nin''2 PXtJ' is often said (e.g. ch. 22, 10), 7Nb' never occurs as a designation of 
the priest, nor is it throughout this narrative used of Samuel. 

/. 28—11. I 23 

MT. Hannah alone is mentioned as coming up with Samuel to Shiloh 
{vv. 24-28^: so V. 22 'I,' V. 23 'thou'); when the account of the 
visit is ended, an unnamed ' he ' appears as the subject of innc*''!, who 
finally (2, 1 1^) is resolved into Elqanah. Had Elqanah, according to 
the conception of the writer, been present at this visit to Shiloh, he 
would assuredly have been named expHciily at an earlier stage of the 
narrative. There is the less ground for supposing that LXX altered 
arbitrarily the genders at the end, as in Iheir text Elqanah is already 
introduced in v. 24; so that the masc. in v. 28, had the translators 
had "inn{J'''1 before them, would have occasioned no difficulty, and 
given no occasion for a change. On these grounds there is a strong 
probability that LXX have here preserved the original text. Pesh. 
Vulg. render inniJ'^1 by a plural verb (as though the reading were 
1innC'"'1 : comp. Gen. 27, 29. 43, 28^, where the punctuators direct 
inriL"' to be read as a plur.) ; KIo. suggests that D^i' may be a mutilated 
fragment of i'S'lc:^': but neither of the remedies relieves the real 
difficulty of MT., that only Hannah is mentioned (not allusively 
merely, but circumstantially) as coming up to Shiloh with Samuel, and 
only Elqanah is mentioned (2, 11) as returning from Shiloh to Ramah. 
If it be true that i, 28^ MT. is but a variant of 2, 1 1* LXX, it will follow 
that Hannah's Song is inserted in MT. and LXX in a different place. 

2, i-io. Hannah's Song '^. 

I. ""Jlp ntDl] The figure is that of an animal carrying its head 
high, and proudly conscious of its strength : cf. i/^. 92, 1 1. 112,9; ^"^ 
(in the Hif'il) v. 10. ^. 75, 5. 6. 89, 18 al. On the contrary, Jer. 48, 
25, 3N10 \-\\> nynji 

nin''3 (2)] 27 MSS., and some Rabb. quotations, ap. Aptowitzer, I 
(see List of Abbreviations), p. 37, ''j^^^? : so LXX, Vulg., and moderns 
generally. The variation in the parallel clause is an improvement : cf. 
xl,. 3, 8a. 18, 7a. Is. 40, 27b. 49, 5b. 

•"J ''a'^IX bv ''2 2n-|] For these words LXX seem to have read am 
^Q "'^''IN 7y, which may be preferable (We. Now. Hpt.) : the thought 
inj)1t^''2 TirnDC' is rather parallel to clause c (cf. a), than the ground 
of it. Bu. Sm. prefer MT. For the figure "iD 3m, cf ^. 35, 21. Is. 

' See on this Song, in addition to the Commentaries, P. Haupt's learned and 
interesting study, ' The Prototype of the Magnificat,' in ZDMG. 1904, pp. dil-dl^. 

24 The First Book of Samuel, 

57, 4 — a gesture of derision and contempt. For the retrocession of 
the tone (3ni, viU'el), cf. 4 I^TX 8 '\>^'0 ; and see GK. § 296, f. 
■jnyi^J'O] nyy.i''' means here deliverance, help: see on 14, 45. 

2. *]n^2 pN '•3] The clause gives an insufficient reason for Clip pN 
rrri^a, besides destroying the parallelism, and (by the second person) 
being out of connexion with 2^ and 2^; in LXX also it is in a different 
place, viz. a/ier 2°. Upon these grounds it is probably to be regarded 
as a gloss (Lo. Now. Dhorme), or, in the form "]n72 C^Hp )"'S ''3 
(LXX), as a variant of 2^ (Bu. Hpt.). 

-nv] Cf. Dt. 32, 4. 15. 18. 37 ; Is. 30, 29 ; r/^. 23, 3; and (where 
the thought also is similar) \p. 18, 32 ; Is. 44, 8. 

3. nnin imn ^J^] The two verbs do-wSeVws, the first verb expressing 
a general relation, for which in English an adverb would commonly be 
used, and the second, expressing the principal idea of the sentence, 
being subordinated to the first for the purpose of defining and 
limiting the range of its application : so Jer. 13, 18 UC l7''SK'n shew 
lowliness, sit down ■= sit down lowly, and frequently in Hosea : i, 6 
Dms Tiy fl''D1K N^; 5, n l^n ^''Nin hath taken upon himself, hath 
2ualked = hath walked willingly; 6, 4= 13, 3 17'n D''3t^'D; 9, 9 
innc' '!p''KDyn; Is. 7, 11 MT. etc. (GK. § 120s; Ew. § 285^1). An 
idiom more common in Syriac (Nold. Syr. Gr. § 337) than in Hebrew. 
In Hebrew the construction noticed on i, 12 is generally preferred. 

nnna nnaa] The reduplication, as Dt. 2, 27 "l"ni T'^'^ ^ in the zvay, 
in the way (and not elsewhere) will I go;' 16, 20 f)*nn pi'i pl^ 
^justice, justice (and this alone) shalt thou follow;' Qoh. 7, 24 (GK. 
§ 133^)- ' -Do not let your words breathe ever ("I3"^n), and emphatically 
(nnaa nnaa), a spirit of haughtiness.' But the line is unduly long, as 
compared with 3b ; and the word may have been accidentally repeated. 

^:i NV""] Clause b, though not attached to a by 1, is governed by bs 
at the beginning : so i/^. 35, 19. 75, 6, and with X? i/'. 9, 19. Is. 23, 4^. 
38, i8^ vh HD^ Job 3, II, |a \p. 13, 5 ; comp. GK. § i52'''.^ The person 
of the verb here changes in the second clause, and the repetition of 7K 
(Hpt.) would certainly be an improvement. 

1 Comp. similarly after \]U7 ^- 10, l. 44, 25. 74, i. 88, 15. Is. 63, l7^ 
Hb. I, I3^ Job 10, 18 ; HD hv f- 10, 13 : HO IV 79, 5 (nearly = 89, 47) ; '•HD IV 
74, 10; njX IV 62, 4; ''D 89, 7 (cf. 49). 106, 2. Is. 43, 23. 

//. 7-7 25 

pny] ^. 75, 6: also 31, 19. 94, 4t. See Z^;f. 801^. 

niyn] So Job 36, 4: cf. mj"iot< Pr. 28,20; nira Is. 27, II ; nwan 

Is. 40, 14 al. ; niD^n ^/'. 49, 4 al. ;mDn if/. 76, 11. Pr. 22, 24. Poetic, 
amplificative plurals (GK. § 1246). 

n'hbv IJ^riJ i6)] Read with the Qre lh. i6 and >h, being pro- 
nounced alike, were sometimes in error written one for the other : and 
in certain cases (though not always) the correction was made by the 
Massorah (see Lex. 52ot>). 'And by Him actions are fes/ed or es/i- 
ma/ed' (viz. by the application of a measure, |3i^, Ex. 5, 18. Ez. 45, 11); 
for 7, as introducing the efficient cause with a passive verb, see Lex. 
5r4<i, GK. § i2i\ LXX kol Oeos iToiiJ.d(wv would correspond no 
doubt (cf. 4 Ki. 12, 11) to 1?J^ -'N"! : but in all probability the rendering 
is simply a free one ; if pn ?^<1 had once stood here, it is difficult to 
understand why it should have been changed to 13DnJ v1. The epithet 
ni3p l^ri esiimalcr of hearts is applied to Yahweh in Pr. 21, 2. 24, i2t, 
and ninn \2T\ ih. 16, 2t; here it is said that man's actions are estimated 
by Him. The argument is : Do not speak arrogantly : for Yahweh 
has full knowledge of what you do, and your actions are thus all 
appraised by Him. 

4. D"'^D] in the pi. by attraction to Dm33, because this is the 
principal idea, and what the poet desires to express is not so much that 
the bows, as that the warriors themselves, are broken. Cf. Is. 21, 17. 
Zech. 8, 10 ; and Ew. § 317^, GK. § 146*. Ehrlich, however, suggests 
cleverly ir.n Dnaj ^B'B; the two verbs parallel, as Is. 20, 5. 37, 27 al. 

h^n i-iin] x\r. 18, 33 ^^n ^nrxDn Wt\. 

5. 'y\ *iy] lit. '■even to the barren — she beareth seven ' = even the 
barren beareth seven, ny recurs in the same sense Job 25, 5 ' lo, even 
to the moon, it doth not shine.' For ly ^^^n (^in absol. as Dt. 15, 11), 
Reifm. Klo. Bu. Now. Kitt. would read "t^y v'ln cease to toil, probably 
rightly. The v. is evidently related to Jer. 15,9 nync'n Tch^^ ni?bcN : 
though which is original cannot from a mere comparison of the two 
passages be determined. 

6a. Dt. 32, 39 n"'ns*i n^DN ""Jn: 6^. ^. 30, 4. 

^y^i] continuing the ptcp., as \\). 34, 8. 65, 9 etc. : Tenses, §§ 80, 117; 
GK. §§ III", II 6^: {^end). 

7. U'niD] To be poor is C'll; so we should expect ^^19.- t^'"l'' (Qal) 

26 The First Book of Samuel, 

means, however, to impoverish in Jud. 14,5; and tJ'liJ to be impoverished 
in Gen. 45, 11 al. {Lex. 439^); so 'contamination of signification 
through confusion with E'"' may be suspected' {Moove, Judges, p. 337). 

DJOno FIN ^"•DC'ro] for this poet, use of pjn, introducing emphatically 
a new thought, cf. Dt. 33, 20 '^^l^ fjx vnr fiidi. V^. 65, 14 si^ lyynn"' 
ITB'S and often in II Isaiah, as 42, 13 rT'lX'' fjN yn\ 43, 7 5]^ vni^"' 
ITT'^J'y. Cf. Z^.r. 64^. 

8*. Hence (with variations) ^. 113, 7 f. The nst^X (cf. Lam. 4, 5) 
is the mound of dung and other rubbish, now called a mezbele, or 
' place of dung,' which accumulates outside an eastern town or village, 
and on which beggars sit, asking alms of passers-by, and, by night, 
often sleep. See Wetzstein in Delitzsch's Hiob (on 2, 8), quoted in 
Davidson's Job (in the Camb. Bible, p. 1 4). — In clause a the main 
division is at jV2N (cf. on i, 28): the two clauses which follow are 
parallel, the force of D-TIJ'' 1 being dependent on, and deter- 
mined by, Tt^'in?, — 'to make them to sit with nobles, and he will 
(= and lo) cause them to inherit,' etc. So Is. 10, 2^. 13, 9b. i^^ 25. 
45, I. i/f. 105, 22. Pr. 5, 2 al. : cf. Tenses, § 118 ; GK. § 1141", 

8^. I.e. because the earth is owned by Yahweh, and He can dispose 
of it, as He will. LXX, however, omits 8^, and in heu of g^ reads 
8t8ov? evx^v Tw €vxofxiv(t}' Koi evXoyrjcrev err] SiKatou = ^1"]? "'!1^? ID^ 
'^'}y[ D''i?"''n^ niJK'^. Apparently this variation represents an attempt to 
accommodate the Song more closely to Hannah's position. But, as 
We. remarks, it is not in harmony with the general tenor of the Song 
(which represents God as granting 7nore than the desires or expecta- 
tions of His worshippers). 

8c. ""pvo] Only here : if correct, from plif (Job 28, 2. 29, 6) = P^J, 
to pour Old, melt, cast, and so something cast firm and hard (cf. P^JfJ, 
from PT^, Job 41, 15. 16, and p^'10 Job 38, 38), i.e. a metal pillar. 

9. lOtJ"' VT'Dn ""^n] Ehrlich, cleverly, (Neh. 9, i2)"i>*^ VT'DH "hiyrQ. 
This, it is true, brings \\\t figure of 9*^ into logical antithesis with that 
of 9^ : but the idea of 9* is antithetic to that of 9^ (apart from the 
figure by which it is expressed) in MT., and with that the poet may 
have been satisfied. On D'''T'Dn godly (properly, kind') see the writer's 
Parallel Psalter, p. 443 f. 

IDn^] Cf. Jer. 49, 26. 50, 30 : also (in Qal) i/^. 31, 18 hW} 1»T. 

//. ']-io 27 

10. 13^"1?0 inn'' nin''] LXX Kupios acr^ev^ Trotrycret tov avn'SiKov airoO, 

i.e. (cf. 4^) '1:1^9 nn; (cf. Is. 9, 3) for nno inm, which Th. We. Klo. 
would restore here. But the change is at least not a necessary one ; 
the casus pendents {Tenses, § 197. 2 ; GK. § 143*^) is forcible and very 
idiomatic: see ^. 10, 5. 11, 4. 46,5. 89, 3. 90, 10. Is. 34, 3.— The 
existing text of LXX after this clause exhibits a long insertion 
borrowed from Jer. 9, 23 f.^ 

Dyn^ D^?2K'3 iby] Cf. y\r. 18, 14. The suffix in "bv (if MT.nntp is 
retained) is to be referred to individual members of the class V^HD, 
whom the poet, for the moment, mentally particularizes. There are 
many such cases in Heb. poetry, e.g. Jer. 9, 7. 10, 4. 16, 6^. 31, 15 
end (^^X ""a n^i3 b Dmn r\y^p). Job 18, 5. 21, 19-21. 30. \p. 7, 3. 
17, n f. 35, 7 f . 41, 6f. 84, 8: see further on II 24, 13; GK. 
§ 145m. Bu. Now. Hpt. would read Dp) n^^'^1 pbv. the Most High 
in heaven [but CCk^^O ^/rom heaven ' would be better ; on the inter- 
change of 3 and D see Introd. § 4. i c <5 y] will break them (i/r. 2, 9). 

'b TV [n^] i/'. 29, II [n^ loy^ ry ^"\ 

^X)] i.e., as pointed, thai he may exalt. But the sense is forced: 
and probably 0")^] should be read. Cf. Tettses, § 174. 

13?d] So i/'. 18, 51 ; •'3/D i/^. 2, 6. — It is plain that this verse, at any 
rate, cannot have been spoken by Hannah, even granting that the 
allusion is to the ideal king. The ideal itself, in a case like the pre- 
sent, presupposes the actual (notice especially the expression His 
anohtted)] and the thoughts of the prophets of Israel can only have 
risen to the conception of an ideal king after they had witnessed the 
establishment of the monarchy in their midst. Far more probably, 
however, the reference is to the actual king. And indeed in style and 
tone the Song throughout bears the marks of a later age than that of 
Hannah. Nor do the thoughts appear as the natural expression of 
one in Hannah's position : observe, for instance, the prominence given 
to 'the bows of the mighty are broken :' and contrast in this respect 
the Magnificat (Luke i, 46—55), where though elements are borrowed 
from this Song, they are subordinated to the plan of the whole, and 
the first thought, after the opening expression of thankfulness, is ' For 

* Comp. the insertion in \p. 14, 3 LXX from Romans 3, 13-18. 

28 The First Book of Samuel, 

He hath regarded the lowliness of His handmaiden^ The presence of 
the &cmg here does not prove more than that it was attributed to 
Hannah at the time when the Books of Samuel were compiled : 
indeed, as its position in LXX and MT. is not the same, its insertion 
may even belong to a later period still. A sober criticism, while not 
asserting categorically that the Song cannot be by Hannah, will recog- 
nize that its specific character and contents point to an occasion of a 
different kind as that upon which it was composed. The central 
thought of the Song is the abasement of the lofty and the elevation of 
the lowly, which the poet illustrates in a series of studied and well- 
balanced contrasts, vv. 4-8. On the ground of some humiliation 
which, as it seems, has recently befallen his foes, he breaks out v. i in 
a tone of triumphant exultation, and bids those whose sole thought 
was how to magnify their own importance recollect that God's all-seeing 
eye was ever upon them, v. 3. He points vv. 4-8 to the instances 
which experience affords of the proud being abased, and the humble 
exalted. The poem ends vv. 9-10 with an expression of confidence 
for the future. Human strength is no guarantee of success. Such as 
set themselves in opposition to Yahweh and seek to thwart His pur- 
poses only come to ruin : those devoted to Him are secure. Yahweh 
judges the earth, and in so doing designs the triumph of His own 
anointed king. From the last words it was inferred by Ewald\ 
that the poet is a king, who alludes to himself in the third person. 
Bat the tone is national rather than individual ; and Smend^ may be 
right in supposing it to have been spoken originally in the name of the 
people, and intended to depict Israel's triumph over the heathen and 
the ungodly. 

11*. Read with LXX nnionn ^jbni; and connect with i, 28^ as 
shewn on p. 22. 

7y] Several MSB. read ^N. See, however, on i, 10. 

11^. mC'O nTl] was ministering (at the time in question, and with 
which the narrative is about to deal): cf. Gen. 37, 2. Ex. 3, i. 2 Ki. 
6, 8: Tenses, § 135. 5. Cf. LXX ^v ActTotipywv ; Luke i, 10 r]v 
TTpo(j(.v)(pii.i.vov. 4,20. II, 14. 13, 10. Acts I, 14. 10, 24. 12, 20 etc. 

^ Die Dicliter des Alten Btmdes, I. i (1S66), p. 157 ff. 
2 ZATIV. 1 888, p. 144. 

//. 10-14 ^9 

13-14- Is what is described here an abuse on the part of the priests, 
or a rightful due ? K 1 5 f clearly describe an abuse ; and D3 at the 
beginning, which expresses a climax, shews that v. 13 f. must describe 
an abuse likewise (We.). DDC'O, therefore, in MT. will denote 
merely custom, not right, and the clause will read, 'And the custom of 
the priests with the priests (was this)^ :' since Th., however, practically 
all Commentators (including even Keil) have followed LXX, Vulg. in 
joining 13^ to 12^, and in reading with LXX (Trapa tov Xaov), for 
nyn ns c^nan, £3yn rixo fnbn (cf on i, 24: Pesh. Targ. and 9 
Heb. MSS. also read nxo, but with the pi. CJnsn) : ' they knew not 
Yahweh, or the right (i.e. the rightful due) of the priest from the 

people :' comp. esp. Dt. t8, 3 '•nnr HNO Dyn nx» D^JHDn DstTD .TH- nn 

It is objected by Ehrlich to this view, that when the first of two or more nonns 
has riN, all must have it, so that 'V\ tSDSJ'O DNI would be needed here. It is 
true, this is the general rule (e.g. Ex. 35, 10-19. Jos. 21, 13-18) : but there are 
exceptions to it : not only Ex. 24, 1 2 (where the \ of niVOHl ilTinn"! is explained 
by Ehrlich as the 1 of 'concomitance' S^Lex. 253*]), but also Ex. 12, 28 [18 MSS. 
and Sam. pHK flKI], 32, 2. i S. 7, 3 (text dub.). 8, 14. 18, 4" [?rd. rnoOl 
Ehrl.]. II 19, 6. I Ki. i, 10 [10 MSS. JINI]. 44. 10,4. 15, 15. 2 Ki. 10, 11 ; and 
in later Hebrew (A. M. Wilson, Hebraica, 1890, p. 220), i Ch. i, 32. 2, 13-15. 8, i. 
Ezr. 9, 3. Neh. 9, 6. Possibly there are other instances : but these, even disregarding 
the textually doubtful ones, seem sufficient to shew that the rule, though observed 
generally, was not absolute. 

'V\ {^"'N ^3] The constr. is unusual, nnt is to be regarded as a 
ptcp. absolute (cf Gen. 4,15. II 23, 3. Prov. 23, 24. Job 41, 18 
MT.), all men sacrificing = i/, or whenever, a man sacrificed, etc. (see 
GK. §§ 116^, 159'); the pred. is then introduced by the pf and waw 
conv. S31 (GK. §11200), precisely as, in an analogous case, after DX 
(Gen. 31, 8 rh^^ . . . nJDN'' n^< if ever he said . . . , then the flock used 
to bear . . .: Tefises, § 123/?, GK. § 159^). In other words, C''N h'2 
nnr nnr is the syntactical equivalent of n2T n3T'' DX C^''N. The constr. 
would be more normal, if C'^X i'^ were preceded by ^^■^1 : see Jud. 
19, 30; Ex. 33, 7b. 

^•kl'aa] The implicit subject is T'E'^tpn ; see on 16, 4, and comp. 11,2. 

^ Though we should rather in this case expect , , , OSt^D nTI : cf. . , . l^"'! '"''^ 
Dt. 15, 2. 19,4. I Ki. 9, 15; Nn. 8, 4 ... nb'VD HTI. i Ki. 7, 28. 

30 The First Book of Samuel, 

So, after a D of comparison, Jud. 14, 6. 2 S. 3,24. Is. 10, 14. Zech. 
12, 10. 13,9. 

Cjjj'n vh^ 2^T»ni] lit. the prong, the three teeth ^ — a case of appo- 
sition {Tenses, § 188; GK. § 131°). ^^f (not Twb^), ]^ being fern.: 
cf. Dnyn ^bf Nu. 35, 14; D^3E>n vhf Lev. 25,21. To be sure, in 
14) 5 i^ in the metaph. sense of z. pointed rock is masc. ; whether it was 
also in that of the tooth of a prong, is more than we can say ^. If it 
was, we must read either CrklTi rwh^ J^TDni, or (We.) rwb^ ■hrc\ 

1 4 f. Observe how in these verses the tenses are throughout fre- 
quentatives (continuing 1 3 N3l). 

"13] can only be rendered therewith : the Versions express the sense 
for himself, which is more suitable, but requires 17 for 13. 

n^Ei>3 DC'] Tautologous. LXX for Dti* express nin''7 nin]?. 

15. |1"lDp''] The I is the original termination of 3 pi. impf. pre- 
served in classical Arabic (in the indicative mood), Aramaic (usually), 
Ethiopic, Phoenician ^ 

In the OT. it occurs sporadically (305 times altogether), though the 
principle regulating its occurrence is difficult to determine. It is not 
a mark of antiquity, for, though it occurs seldom in the latest books, 
those in which it occurs with greatest comparative frequency are not 
(upon any view) the most ancient (56 times in Dt., 37 in Isaiah, 15 in 
1-2 Kings, 23 in Job, 12 in Genesis, 7 in Numbers, 15 in a single 
Psalm, 104). Further, while it sometimes abounds in particular 
sections (e.g. Gen. 18, 28-32: Joel 2, 4-9), it is absent from others 
belonging to the same narrative, or of a similar character (e.g. 9 times 
in the Laws, Ex. 20-23, never in the Laws, Lev. 17—26). From its 
frequency in Dt., Job, the Book of Isaiah, and some of the Psalms, it 
may be inferred that it was felt to be a fuller, more emphatic form 

^ Cf. the dl3e\us TptKwXio^, mentioned in a sacrificial inscription of Cos (Jburn. 
of Hellenic Studies, ix. 335 = Patoa and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 1891, p. 82) ; 
and the rpidupoXov, which according to Eustathius on //. i. 463 {ib. p. 327) was 
preferred by the Greeks as a sacrificial implement to the ■nt^TTwPoXov. (Kapirooj in 
the same inscr., see p. 336, illustrates the use of «a/)7rcuffis, oKompnojais in LXX.) 

2 If Albrecht's explanation {ZAW. 1896, p. 76, see p. 60) of ip in 14, 5 being 
masc. is correct, it would not follow for JJJ' here. 

^ Cooke, NSI. 5, 22. 33, 6. 

//. 14-16 31 

than that in ordinary use, and hence was sometimes preferred in an 
elevated or rhetorical style. In i Sam. it occurs 8 times — 2, 15. 16. 
22 (bis). 23. 9, 13 {bis), ir, 9 : in 2 Sam. once only, not in the narra- 
tive, but in the Psalm 22, 39. 

ItOp , though rendered conventionally burn, does not mean to bum so as to 
destroy (which is f|"lb'), but to cause to become sweet smoke (nibp : cf. the Greek 
Kv'iar]) : comp. the Arab, qatara (of meat), to exhale odour in roasting. The word 
is always used of burning either a sacrificial offering (Lev. i, 9 etc.) or incense 
(Ex. 30, 7) ; and would be better rendered, for distinctness, as in Driver and 
White's Leviticus (in Haupt's Sacred Books of tJie OT.), consume in sweet smoke. 
In P (always) and Chr. (mostly) the verb is used in the Hif 'il ; but in the older 
language the Pi'el is usual (e.g. Amos 4, 5) ; and probably both here and in v. 16 
we should vocalize P"lt2j5^ (notice in v. 16 ItSi? ; ^"1^?^ 1^|^ is of a very 
anomalous type ; GK. § 113", second sentence). 

N2l] LXX rightly rjpx^To. The pf. with waw conv, appears simi- 
larly after D"1D3, though of reiteration in present time, in Ex. i, 19^ 
before the midwife comes to them 117*1 they are wont to bear. 

16. "iCX'^lJ This should strictly be "*^?'!, in accordance with the 
other tenses before and after : but Hebrew is sometimes negligent in 
such cases to maintain the frequentative tense throughout ; see Jud. 
12, 5f. ; Jer. 6, 17; and Tenses, § 114. However, n?2N''1 might be a 
scribal error for ICiSI (so GK. § 112^1 ; Smith's '1I0N''] is against the 
usage of Heb. prose). 

nbnn orj \\y'^\>'' "It^p] ' Let them bum (emph.) the fat first, and 
(then) take,' etc. The inf. abs. strengthens the verb in a manner 
which may often be represented in our idiom by the use of italics. 
In DVa, the consciousness of DV is lost, and it is used as a mere 
adverb of time, especially to express the present time, as contrasted 
with the future, i.e. (in our idiom)yfrj/ of all, first. So Gen. 25, 31 
•':5 imian ns DV3 niao sell me first (before I give thee the pottage) 
thy birthright, 33. i Ki. 22, 5 inquire, I pray, first at the word of 
Yahweh. See Ges. Thes. s.v.. Lex. 409^ h, and We. p. 37 note. 

Tir23 mxn nij'w] Similarly II 3, 21 "ic'sj nisn n^TN ^23, Dt. 12, 
20. 14, 26. I Ki. II, 37 al. Both nus (in Pi'el), and the subst. ^J^< 
(23, 20), are rarely used except in conjunction with ti'DJ. 

jnn nny ••D 1^ noNi] ' And he would say to him, " Thou shalt give 
it me now." ' With this reading, '•3, standing before the direct narra- 
tion, is like on recitativum (e.g. Luke 4, 21), and ^1, ? (constantly). 

32 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

and cannot be represented in English except by inverted commas : so 
lo, 19 MT. Gen. 29, 33. Jos. 2, 24. i Ki. i, 13. 2 Ki. 8, 13 al. The 
Qre and 17 MSS., however, for 17 read N^ (so LXX) 'And he would 
say, No ; for (= but) thou shalt give it now ' (cf. 12, 12 : II 16, 18 al.). 
The latter is more pointed, and deserves the preference. Targ. here 
agrees with MT. ; Pesh. Vulg. express both readings \ 

"•nnp^] The bare perf. in the apod, is uncommon and emphatic : 
Tenses, § 136 y : Nu. 32, 23. 'And if not, I take it by force 1 ' 

17. 'V\ 1^'NJ '•3] 'for the men (viz. Eli's sons) contemned,' etc. : see 
Nu. 16, 30^ '•"'' ns n^NH D"'ti'JXn IVSJ '•3. 0''tJ>3S'n (with the art.) 
denotes men who have been in some manner specified (e.g. 6, 10. 
Ex. 5, 9), not men in general. 

18. ny3] accus., as a youth, etc.: see GK. § 118Q, and on v. 33. 
*13 Tiax] for the constr. in the accus. after TiJn, see GK. § 121^ ; 

and cf. 17, 5. On the 'ephod' see DB. (Driver), EB. (Moore), and 
the writer's Exodus (191 1), p. 312 f. 

19. nn^ym , , , nc^yn] ' used to make . . . and bring up : ' Gen. 2, 6 

nonsn '•is ^3 ns* npcm rhvi" in*i. D''0''n nnr, as i, 21 : cf. on i, 3. 

20. "labni , . , ^DXI . . . T^Sl] 'and Eli would bless . . ., and say 
. . ., and they would go to his place.' 

Dli'"'] LXX aTTOTtWi, i.e. ^'^\ make good: cf. Ex. 21, 36 (likewise 
followed by nnn). With MT. cf. Gen. 4, 25 (ri'^:'). 45, 7. 

f'Nt^•] Difficult syntactically. As the text stands, the subj. can be 
only the implicit ^^^^n (see on 16, 4) 'which he that asked asked '= 
which was asked : but the passage is not one in which this impersonal 
construction would be naturally in place. Either, with We., we must 
point as a ptcp. pass. ^'^^ asked /o)--= lent to (see i, 28: the masc. 
ad sensum^ the npSE' being Samuel), or we must suppose that h\^^ 
is an error for •^^^^K' (' in lieu of the petition which she asked for ^ 
Yahweh '). The former gives the better sense, though "itJ'X with a bare 
ptcp. is not very common (Dt. i, 4. i Ki. 5, 13). If the latter be right, 

* Similar variations occur in other passages: thus Jos. 5, 14 MT. Vulg. Targ. 
K^; LXX, Pesh. 1^: i Ki. 11, 22 MT. Vulg. Targ. K^; LXX 1^; Pesh. both. 
Cf. on V. 3. 

^ Inadvertently quoted by Jastrovir {JBLit. 1900, p. S7) ' asked of^ Of course 
I do not suppose this to be the meaning of ? 7\f!i?. 

//. i6~22 33 

we must suppose the double reference of ^XtJ' to be played upon : the 
' petition' which was asked ^Yahweh in i, 17. 27 was also asked_/b/- 
Ilim. The Versions merely guess : LXX, Pesh. Vulg. * which thou 
didst lend,' unsuitably : Targ. very freely 'which was asked from before 
Yahweh.' Bu. Sm. Now. Kit. Dh. read i^^Xfn, rendering, ' in return 
for the loan (so EVV.), which she hath lent unto Yahweh ; ' cf. i, 28. 
'Loan' for nW maybe right: cf. NHWB. iv. 491^5 PS. col. 4008. 
"itDlpO? 1D?ni] ' they would go to his place ' is not in accordance with 
Hebrew style. LXX iCIpD^ D'^xn "i^ni : 12 MSS. and Pesh. I3^ni 
D»1pr07. Either of these readings may be original : but probably We. 
is right in concluding vy\prh "I^m to be the original reading : in MT. 
the verb was read as a plur. and so became 13^ni, LXX treated it as 
a singular, and supplied ' the man.' 

21. nps '•3] obviously cannot be right : the fact that Yahweh visited 
Hannah cannot form the ground of what is related in v. 20. Read, 
with LXX, Pesh. (and AV. implicitly): "'pS*!. 3 and 1 are confused 
elsewhere : e.g. Is. 39, ib j;oti'''1, for which LXX, Pesh. and the parallel 
in 2 Ki. 20, 12 have rightly yo^* '>3; and Jer. 37, 16 where XI ""D is 
evidently an error for X3"'1 (LXX kox yXOev). 

'•' Dy] i.e. at His sanctuary: cf. Dt. 22, 2, and Zex. 768^ 3. 

22. yjDC'l] as I, 3 : 'and he heard from time to time ' (Dr. Weir). 
'Jl D"'C'Jn nx] See Ex. 38, 8. The entire clause (from "ic^x nxi) 

is not found in LXX, and is probably not part of the original text (the 
context speaks of a i?3\n with doors, not of an ^nx : i, 9. 3, 3. 15). 
nixnvn, both here and in Ex., is paraphrased in Targ. Pesh. who 
prayed (or who came to pray) : Vulg. renders here qime observabant, in 
Ex. quae exctibabant. But X2!»* is used often peculiarly in the ritual 
legislation of the Pent, (the ' Priests' Code ') of the service of the 
Levites about the Tent of Meeting; and Ex. 38, 8 and here expresses 
the performance of menial duties by the women. In the fragments of 
a Targum published by Lagarde {Prophetae Chaldaice, 1872, p. xiv) 
from the margin of the Cod. Reuchl., there appears an endeavour to 
palliate the sin of Eli's sons (as described in the existing Hebrew text) : 
nx^v!? jr.xn p'^idt x^k'j ^jmp n> incm n^i : [-i]nx [n]sD {delayed the 
women's offerings). Comp. Bacher, 'On the Targum to the Prophets,' 
in the ZDMG. 1874, p. 23. 

1365 D 

34 The First Book of Samuel, 

nj?1D PHn] the Tent of Meeting. The sense in which *lj;i?3 was 
understood is explained in Ex. 25, 22. 29, 42. 

23. 'ai IB'N] 'for that, in that (15, 15. 20, 42) I hear the accounts 
of you (as) evil, from ' etc. Ci''y"i, not cynn, like nyi nnm Gen. 37, 2; 
nyn I'lXn nan Nu. 14, 37; Not: D»n^ ibs"' Ezek. 4, 13 (a tertiary 
predicate). But LXX do not express the words ; the sense is clear 
without them ; and they may have been originally (Lo. Bu. Now.) 
a marginal gloss (without TxC) on nPNH D''"l3n3. In this case, of 
course, "i^N will mean simply which. Otherwise nj)") D3ri3"n"nN 
(Gen. 37, 2) might well have stood here (Ehrlich), and would yield an 
excellent sense. 

il^N Dyn 73 DND] ' from all the people, (even) these.' An un- 
paralleled juxtaposition. Why not ntn Dyn ^D flNO, as uniformly 
elsewhere ? LXX have iravros rov \a.ov Kvpiov, whence We., remark- 
ing that in a later time wrbii was apt to be substituted for niiT (e.g. 
2 Ch. 10, 15 ; 18, 5; 22, 12; 23, 9 compared with i Ki. 12, 15. 22, 6 ; 
2 Ki. II, 3. 10), would restore niH'' Cy bi ns?D (cf. v. 24 etid). This, 
however, leaves the article in Dyn unexplained: and it is simpler to 
suppose that npN (once, no doubt, written 7N, as still eight times in 
the Pent., and i Ch. 20, 8, and in Phoenician^) has arisen by ditto- 
graphy from the following 7N : so Bu. Now. Sm. Ehrl. 

^^^'\ lit. from with=Trapa with a gen. : so with njp to hiy, V\\h, i'NtJ' 
(8, 10), etc.; see Lex. 86^. 

24. 'jl ntJ'N] 'which I hear Yahweh's people to be spreading.' So 
already Rashi, comparing Ex. 36, 6 njn?D3 ?1p ITi^yi. Elsewhere, it 
is true, where this idiom occurs, it is accompanied by an indication of 
the locality in or through which the proclamation is ' made to pass ' 
(as Ex. /. c; 2 Ch. 30, 5 ^Nnsi*^ ^33 ; 36, 22 (=Ezr. i, i); Ezr. 10, 7; 
Neh. 8, 15: Lev. 25, 9 D3^^-|^« ^33 nsic^ T'3yn): but the alternative 
rendering (AV. RV.) '(Ye) make the people of Israel to transgress' 
is doubly questionable: (i) oriN is desiderated after nn''3yD (see on 
6, 3); (2) "i3y, when it signifies to transgress, is always followed by 
an accus. of the law or precept 'overpast,' e.g. '•"' ""S DN 15, 24. Nu. 

1 Cooke, NSI. 6, 22 !?N h^'^\>^ D3^N' these holy gods; 27, 3 ^NH D^JODH 
these images; 45, 2 ^N n''B'1pD3 ; and CIS. i. 14, 5 7N nn3D these offerings. 

//. 22-2S 35 

14, 41 ; rnin is. 24, 5 (comp. the Commentators on ^. 17, 3b), and 
in the Hif. does not occur in this sense at all. The case is one, 
however, in which the integrity of the text is reasonably open to 

25. ' If a man sinneth against a man, God will mediate (for him) : 
But if a man sin against Yahweh (emph.), who can intercede' 
for him ? ' 
I.e. For an offence of man against man, God may interpose and 
arbitrate (viz. through His representative, the judge) : for an offence 
against Yahweh, there is no third parly able to do this. For DNI^N as 
signifying, not the judge as such, but the judge as the mouthpiece of 
a Divine sentence, see Ex. 21, 6. 22, 7 f. : and comp. ib. 18, 16, where 
the judicial decisions given by Moses are described as the ' statutes 
and laws of God.' Ideas parallel to this occur among other ancient 
nations; comp. Sir Henry Maine's Aftcient Law, ch. i, and the ex- 
pression applied to judges in Homer : otVc 6€fXL(rTa<s IIpos Atos eipvarat 
(II. I. 239). The play between ?p=i to mediate (see \^. 106, 30 irDyi 
^i'£)"'1 Dni'^a, where PBV. 'and prayed' is quite false), and ij^^ann to 
interpose as mediator, specially by means of entreaty (Gen. 20, 17), 
cannot be preserved in English. The idea of mediation or arbitration 
appears in other derivatives (rare) of 7^0; as ^h'ht:, Ex. 21, 22. Dt. 
32, 31; rh'hli Is. 16, 3. In vpB^ the suf!ix must have the force of 
a dative, yi?r him (GK. § 117^; Ew. § 315^); but probably, with We., 
I7p£i1 should be pointed (so Lo. Bu. Now.) : the plur. would be in 
accordance with the construction of D\n^X, as thus applied, in Ex. 
22, 8b. In NDn'' rwsh DN notice the emph. position of niH''^. It is 
the rule with words like DX, ^, Xixh, 'D etc. for the verb to follow 
immediately; when another word follows immediately, it is because 
some emphasis attaches to it: see e.g. 6, 9. Lev. i, 3. 10. Nu. 20, 18. 

The general sense is well expounded by We. (after Ew. Hist. ii. 581 
[Eng. Tr. 412]): For the settlement of ordinary cases arising between 
man and man, there is a 7?SO (arbiter), viz. Elohim (speaking through 
His representative, the judge): if, however, Yahweh is the plaintiff, 

* Or, perhaps (Bu. Now. Sm.), act the tnediator: but ??Snn elsewhere means 
only to mediate by entreaty or prayer. 

D 2 

36 The First Book of Samuel, 

He cannot also (as Elohim) be the ■'pSl?. As the priest in point 
of fact is the judge, this means — the play between ' Yahweh ' and 
' Elohim ' being disregarded : ' the sin of the priest against God cannot 
be adjusted before the tribunal of the priest, but incurs the direct 
vengeance of Heaven.' 

IJ/DkJ'"' N^] See on i, 7. 

':i ^'Sn ''3] Cf. Jud. 13, 23. Grotius (quoted by Th.) illustrates the 
thought from Aeschylus {ap. Plato, Rep. ii. 380 A): 

OTav KaKwcrai Suyfxa TrafjiTn]Sr]v OiXij- 

26. 3"lt31 blV\ \?T\\-= continued growing greater and better : cf. II 3, i 
D^^ni D^^hn . . . prni ihn (which shews that 2iDJ ^nj are adjectives). 
15, 12. Pr. 4, 18. Jon. I, I r. 13. Est. 9, 4 ; after \T1, Ex. 19, 19. 2 Ch. 
17, 12: GK. § w^ end. It is possible, however, that 31L3 may be 
used here of bodily physique, and mean goodly (i. e. fine and comely), as 
9, 2. Gen. 6, 2. Ex. 2, 2. i Ki. 20, 3 (so Dhorme ; cf. Ehrlich). 

Dy] in the estimation of, as II 6, 22. Cf. Luke 2, 52. 

27. "TlvJJ n?3:n] i.e. 'Did I indeed reveal myself to the house of 
thy father, or not, that ye, his descendants, have thus scorned me } ' 
An impassioned question, expressive of surprise, as though the fact 
asked about were doubtful (cf. Hitzig on Job 41, i), not to be 
weakened by treating H as though it were = ^^i\ ■ The inf. abs. adds 
force to the question : GK. § 1 13I. There is no occasion to treat the 
n in n^jjn as dittographed from the n in nin\ 

'J1 DDVn^] MT. 'when they belonged in Egypt to the house of 
Pharaoh.' But this is unnatural ; and it can hardly be doubted that 
^n^y has dropped out after DHVOa, corresponding to LXX hovXtnv 
(cf. Targ. h payn^D). Comp. Lev. 26, 13. Dt. 6, 21. 

28. nhni] GK. § 113'=: Ew. § 351C. 

^"^: •] -^^ Ehrlich observes, the order is correct: see Gen. 12, 19 
rvi^ih 'h ; 1 6, 3. 28, 9, and often ntJ>N^ 1^ ; 29, 29 nnStJ'^ rh ; Jud. 1 7, 5 
\r\:h "b '•n''i; ny!? 'h Ex. 6, 7 (cf. Dt. 29, 12. ch. 12, 22. II 7, 23. 24, 
and frequently); i/^. 94, 22 (for cases of the opposite order, induced 
doubtless by the rhythm, see y\r. 33, 12 [npriJ? "17 would here be heavy]. 
132, 13. Is. 49, 5. Job 13, 24. 30, 21: Lex. 512b). The fact, 
however, that a family, and not an individual, is referred to suggests 

II. 2s-2() 37 

that we should (with LXX teparevetv) vocalize fnpb (Bu.). EhrHch 
objects to this that we always have h \r\;^^ (Ex. 28, 41. 29, i al.) : but 
might not h be prefixed for emphasis ? Otherwise the tribe (inN=//, 
not Jmn), as a whole, must be regarded as ' priest ' to Yahweh ; cf. the 
sing, numbers in Dt. 31, 16^-18. Is. 5, 26-30. 17, 13^-14*, etc. 

m^y^] is naturally Qal (LXX, Pesh. Vulg. Ke. Klo. Bu. Now.), 
though it 7night be Hif. (Targ. Th.) for ni^yn^ (comp. v. 33. II 19, 19 

i^ny^j; Ex. 13, 21 Dnmb; Nu. 5, 22 ^^'h, T\\yh\ Dt. i, 33 Dsnxib; 

26, 12 ■^'?r'V^); however, as the contraction is not common (about 
twenty instances altogether in MT.'), and there is nothing here to 
suggest or require the Hif., the latter is less probable. To go up 
upon the altar, i.e. upon a ledge beside it, as Ex. 20, 26; i Ki. 
12, 33 ; 2 Ki. 16, 12 e?id ; 23, 9 : conversely, IT is used of coming 
down from it. Lev. 9, 22 : cf. i Ki. 1,53. 

IISN nXK^"^] ' to bear, — not, to wear, — the ephod before me.' So 
always. Cf. DB. i. 726^; Moore in EB. ii. 1307; the writer's 
Exodus, 313; and Kennedy's note here. For nin'> ''•k^'^<, cf Dt. 18, i. 

29. pyc] Untranslateable : if |iyD is right, read ^3iyD3; "-Jiyrp (RV., 
implicitly) is not sufficient ^ JiyJD is a word found mostly in poetry, 

1 To those given in the text add II 18, 3 Kt. 1"'Ty^ ; 2 Ki. 9, 15 Kt. T"??; 
Is. 3, 8 mnob ; 23, II nrOB'^ ; 29, 15 inob ; 33, i (comipt) im^JD; Jer. 27, 20 

ini^:n; 37. 12 ^)rb; 39.7 J*'?^; Am. 8,4 n^at^b; ^^.26,7 ycc'^); 73, 2o(?) 

T'ya; 78, 17 ni-lD^. Pr. 31, 3 T\\r\^h; Dan. 11, 35 \^^b. Qoh. 5, 5 N^'lOn^. 
Neh. 10, 39 "lb*y3. 2 Ch. 31, 10 N^3?. (In some of these instances the text 
may be doubtful, or the punctuation as Hif. unnecessar}'.) Comp. in the Nif. 
nbyb Ex. 10, 3. ibc'33 Pr. 24, 17. Picys Lam. 2, II. ^i^{_b job 33, 30; and 
(as pointed) niNIP Ex.34, 24- Dt. 31, 11. Is. i, 12 : also 3"|n3 Ez. 26, 15. 

^ n"'3 , or JT'an (absol.), never means ' in the house : ' by custom the use of the 
accus. to express rest in a place is restricted to cases in which a noun in the 
genitive follows, as TiaN JT'D, "J^tDn nU, ''""' JT'^. So lyiD ^HN* HFlD iv. 22), 
vHX nnS (Ex. 33, 10) at the entrance of his tent : but at the entrance (absolutely) 
would be nnS3, not nnDH simply. So ^X"n"'3, Dn^'fTi may denote 'in 
Bethel,' ' /« Bethlehem:' but * in Gibeon,' 'in Dan' must be expressed by 
pyn23, p3 (see 2 Ki. 10, 29''). Where a word like l^t^^ D"?B'n'' seems to denote 
at Shiloh, at Jerusalem, it will be found that a verb of motion always precedes, of 
which the subst. expresses the goal: so e.g. II 20,3; Dt. 3, i; Jud. 21,12. 
Hence K'lp \p. 134, 2 \=, ' to the sanctuary.' (Exceptions to what has been here 
said may be found in MT., but they are very rare : e.g. Is. 16, 2. 2 Ch. 33, 20.) 

38 The First Book of Samuel, 

and the more elevated prose {^. 26, 8 ■]n''a |iyn, of the Temple; 
Dt, 20, 15 al. le^np \'\'^'0, of heaven) : so it would not be unsuitable. 
The objections that its absolute use is late (i^iyo 2 Ch. 36, i5t), and 
that it is here superfluous, are not cogent. LXX (omitting Tlii:* Itt^x) 
have Ivo. ri iTrefSXeij/a^ . . . dvatSet 6cf>6aXix<2 ; i.e. ^P?n (or ^'•110) and 
(Klo.) ]^}V^, ' Why hast thou looked (or, dost thou look) upon . . . with 
an evil eye?' lit. eyeing it (18, 9). So Bu. Sm. (not Now.). But piyo 
is a very doubtful restoration. 

Daxnnn^] Read probably either the Nif. t:at^'y^rh (Bu.), or 
Dxnnnf) (Ehrlich). 

"•roy!?] This again cannot be right. ' We might easily alter ^Nici''' 
•-Dy!? to '•roy \>'^-\^\ but the h appears also in "Jsi' of LXX' (We.). 
Perhaps '•JSp, — or ^Ti7 , though e/xTrpoaOev does not elsewhere represent 
this, — is the true reading; it is accepted by Hitzig (on Amos 2, 13), 
Bu. Now.; the meaning will be, in full view of me, — aggravating the 

30. ^mON -iIDN] = '/ said' (emph.). The intention, which had 
afterwards to be abandoned, is emphasized by the inf. abs. 

^JS7 laSin''] To walk before any one is to live and move openly 
before him (12, 2. 2 Ki. 20, 3); esp. in such a way as (a) to deserve, 
and consequently {f) to enjoy, his approval and favour. The expression 
is used chiefly of walking before God ; and then sometimes one of 
these ideas is the more prominent, sometimes the other. Thus in 
Gen. 17, I, and prob. in 24, 40. 48, 15 the thought of («■) predominates 
(LXX evapea-Teiv ivavTcov or ivioiriov) ; here, V. 35, and ij/. 56, 14. 116, 
9 [shall, not will] the thought of {b) predominates. (The expression 
is not so strong as D^^bN^ m "]bnnn Gen. 5, 22. 24. 6, 9.) 

31. ':i D^Xl D''^'' nan] A formula occurring besides only 2 Ki. 20, 
17 ( = Is. 39, 6), and in the prophecies of Amos and Jeremiah. 

"lyir nx Tiynii] Cf. for the figure Jud. 2 1, 6 nnx Da-^ Dvn yiji 
ba-^^D and Jer. 48, 25 ninc'J iynn 2N10 pp nynJJ. LXX vocalized 
IKII; but this by no means agrees so well as MT. "^pi with the 
fgure implied in TiyiJI . y^T metaph. of strength, as Job 22, 8 6J'''N1 

psn i^jyi-ir; ij/. 10, 15 ]}^-\ ynr '\2^; 83, 9. 

32. Jiyo nv] Again, if nyr: is right (cf on 29), we must read either 
^Jiyn (RV.) or ^Jiym (RV. ;«.). Eh, however, whose death is recorded 

//. 2g-33 39 

in 4, 2 1, did not survive any time when the temple at Shiloh was 
unfortunate, and Israel in general prosperous. The clause must 
consequendy be corrupt. Bo. suggested Tiy^ "^? ' and thou shalt look 
for a rock of defence : ' but D''3n with an accus. is not to look /or 
something non-existent, or not visible, but to look a/, or behold, 
something actually in view. No satisfactory emendation has been 

"iCi'N ^33] lit. ' in the whole of (that,) as to which ...'=' in all 
wherein . . .' "^UH b^l is commonly followed by a verb of motion, as 
14. 47, in which case it = wherever. 

nx 3''D''''] i'^DTl with a personal object is usually construed with ^ or 
Dy (Gen. 12, 16; 32, 10. 13 al.): the construction with an accus. is 
chiefly Deuteronomic (Dt. 8, 16. 28, 63. 30, 5; so Jer. 18, 10. 32, 
40. 41 ; also Zech. 8, 15. \b. 51, 20). A subject lo TD'''' is desiderated. 
We must either suppose that TW^'' has fallen out after it (Bu. Now. Kit.: 
observe that EVV. supply ' God ' in italics), or read a''D"'N (Sm. Bu. 
alt., Dhorme). 

33. 'Yet one I will not cut off belonging to thee from mine altar,' etc. 
^^ is the dat. of reference, as often in similar phrases : II 3, 29. i Ki. 
2, 4. 9, 5. 14, 10 al. {Lex. 5 1 2^5 5). 

DyrD] Cf. Ex. 21, 14. 

'y\ mb^] Cf. Lev. 26, 16 (certain diseases) B's: n^nrp^ D'^y ni^rO; 
Dt. 28, 65 tj'DJ P3XTI D^:^y ivb. 

mN^] for '^'''y^jh (on v. 28), from [anx] = nXT. mx, however, is 
not substantiated elsewhere, in either Hebrew or the cognate languages: 
it is probable therefore that N is merely an error for n, and that ^■'I'^'pl 
(corresponding to nano in Lev. l.c) should be restored. Cf. Jer. 25, 3 
D^atrs for D^^rn. 

Ti^'DJ . . , T^""!?] The C'N, no doubt, is Abiathar, who escaped the 
massacre of the priests ch. 22, was David's faithful attendant during 
his lifetime, but was removed from the priesthood by Solomon, and 
banished by him from Jerusalem, on account of the part taken by him 
in the attempt of Adonijah to secure the throne (see i Ki. 2, 27). If 
MT. be right, the reference must be to the father, supposed to be 
conscious of the fortunes of his descendant, and suffering with him. 
Such a sense, however, seems to be one which is scarcely likely to 

40 The First Book of Samuel, 

have been in the writer's mind (contrast Job 14, 21). LXX read 
IS^SJ . . , V:''y, the pronouns referring to Abiathar himself, the end of 
whose life was passed in disappointment and vexation. This is 
preferable (so We. Th. Klo. etc.). 

n''21D] the increase (viz. generally, so far as none are specially 
exempted). Or, perhaps, as i Ch. 12, 29, the greater part. 

D"'C'3N iniC"'] 'will die as f?mi' {= in the flower of their age, AV.), 
CtJ'JN being an (implicit) accus., defining their condition at the time of 
dying. So Is. 65, 20 niD'' r\l^ iTND p will die as a man 100 years 
old; Lev. 20, 20 {Tenses, § 161. 3; GK. § 1181). But, though the 
grammatical construction is unexceptionable, D''t:'JN does not signify 
adults, in contradistinction to men of any other age ; and LXX has Iv 
pofKJiaia avBpwv; in all probability therefore a word has fallen out in 
MT., and D'tJ'^S 2nri2 should be restored. 

35. '31 15^'^?3] for the expression, cf. 14, 7. II 7, 3. 2 Ki. 10, 30. 
The clause is attached to what precedes somewhat abruptly, but a 
similar abruptness may be observed sometimes in the Books of 
Samuel : e.g. 9, 6^; 19, 5 r\12^*n) n\S">. 

35^. |?3KJ JT'n] Cf. 25, 28 (the hope expressed by Abigail). 

^IT'CJ'Jd] The passage, like 2, 10, presupposes the establishment of 
the monarchy {>"> rv^K>: 16, 6; 24, 7. 11 etc.). The original pro- 
phecy must have been re-cast by the narrator, and in its new form 
coloured by the associations with which he was himself familiar. The 
meaning is that the faithful priest will enjoy the royal favour con- 

36. '':i n\Tl] lit. 'and it shall be, as regards all that are left 
(= whoever is left) in thy father's house, he shall come ' etc. The 
construction exactly resembles Dt. 20, 11 ; II 15, 35: and without 
b:i, Nu. 17, 20 (cf. 16, 7); I Ki. 19, 17 {Tenses, § 121, Oh. i). The 
force of 73 is similar to that in v. 13. Instead of N12"' the sentence 
might with equal propriety have been resumed by the pf. and zvaiv 
conv. ^<31: see Nu. 21, 8; Jud. 11, 31 : the construction with the 
impf. is, however, somewhat more flowing, and less formal. 

"•JHSD] nSD is to attach: 26, 19. Is. 14, i apy n"'3 bv insDJI : Job 
30, 7 Fu'at (= to cling together) t. (In Hab. 2, 15 read ^B^.) 

The interpretation of the entire passage, from v. 31, is difficult. In 

//. 33-3^ 41 

MT. two troubles are threatened to Eli, (i) a sudden disaster '^i^ \ 
33b, from which few will escape of his entire family (T'3X JT'a v. 31): 
(2) a permanent weakening of his family (32^ ' no old man in thy 
house continually'). No doubt in 31*. 33!^ the allusion is to the 
massacre of the priests at Nob (22, 17-20): and Abiathar himself is 
the one alluded to in 33a, who escaped the massacre, and so was not 
'cut off' from the altar, continuing to hold the office of priest under 
David, and only superseded by Zadoq (the faithful priest of v. 35) 
upon the accession of Solomon. The sign in v. 34 is of course the 
death of Hophni and Phinehas, recorded in ch. 4. 

But with reference to the passage as a whole, it is difficult to resist 
We.'s argument. As the text stands, v. 32^ expresses a consequence of 
31 : it deals, however, with something which Eli is to witness himself: 
hence 31 must refer to something within Eli's own lifetime — which 
can only be the disaster of ch. 4, in which his two sons perished. This 
implies that the survivor in 33 is Ahitub (14, 3); and that 35 relates 
to Samuel (so Th.). But the 'sign' in 34 is also the disaster o'i ch. 4: 
consequently, upon this interpretation, the death of Eli's sons is a 
' sign,' not of some occurrence in the remoter future, but of itself ! 
F. 31 must thus refer to something subsequent to ch. 4, and so, subse- 
quent also to Eli's death (the massacre at Nob, as explained above) : 
it follows that the text of 328' cannot be correct, — as indeed was already 
surmised above, upon independent grounds. LXX omits both 31^ and 
32^ ; and We. supposes that 31^ and 32^ are but two forms of one 
and the same gloss, due originally to an (incorrect) application of 31* 
to the disaster of ch. 4. Still, though it is true that 33a, expressing a 
limitation of 31a, would form a natural sequel to it, it would follow it 
somewhat quickly and abruptly; and the omission in LXX is open to 
the suspicion of being due to the recurrence of the same words fpT 
■jn^nn in both 31b and 32b. What is really wanted in lieu of the 
corrupt words at the beginning of 32 is something which would lead 
on naturally to the notice of XhQ permanent weakening of Eli's family — 

^ This sense of the figure seems to be demanded by the limitation which 
follows in 33* (' Yet one I will not cut offio thee from mine altar '). V. 33' cannot 
be a limitation to 32*": for the sparing of a single individual, on a particular 
occasion, forms no exception to i\it permajient weakening old. family. 

42 The First Book of Samuel, 

which is the point in which 32^ advances beyond 31^^. Did we 
possess 32* in its original form, it would yield, we may suppose, 
a suitable sequence: 31 would refer to the massacre at Nob, 32 to the 
after-history of Eli's family (comp. 36 irT-an nniJH ^D), and 33 would 
revert to the subject of 31 in order to follow the fortunes of the 
survivor, Abiathar (22, 20). 

3. I. np""] precious = rare, as Is. 13, 12 TDO C'lJN 'T'plN. 
}*"1D3] spread abroad = frequent : 2 Ch. 31,5 "'?"^l! P??1- 

2. 'J1 nat^ ''^yi] From here to the end of v. 3 follow a series of 
circumstantial clauses, describing the conditions which obtained at the 
time when what is related in v. 4 took place. 

riina] fem. pi. from nna, an adj. of the form expressive of bodily 
defects Ci.f'5<, D??, "^iW, ^"".0 (GK. § 84b. 21). Syntactically the adj. is 
to be conceived here as an accusative, defining the aspect under which 
Eli's eyes 'began:' lit., therefore, 'began as dim ones' = began to be 
dim. Cf Is. 33, I 'VW nOTina when thou finishest as a devastator = 
when thou finishest to devastate. See GK. § 120^; Tenses, § 161. 2, 
and p. xvi; and cf. Segal, Mi'snaic Hebrew (ipop)- P- 49- But the 
inf. riins would be more in accordance with the Biblical usage of 
^nn (Sm. Bu. Now.): see Dt. 2, 25. 31. Jos. 3, 7 (Sm.). 

^31'' N^] expressing his contmued inability more distinctly than ?3;j X7 
would have done: so Gen. 48, 10; Jos. 15, 63 Kt. 

3l>. Evidendy Samuel was sleeping in close proximity to the ark — 
perhaps, in a chamber contiguous to the 73^1 in which it was, if not, 
as the Hebrew taken strictly would imply, actually in the 73M itself. 

4. ^XIOEJ' bi(\ LXX h^yci^ ijxin:^, no doubt rightly: cf v. 10, where 
we read 'as beforetivie, Samuel, Samuel.' In v. 6 LXX repeats the 
name similarly, not expressing Up^) (which may have come in here as 
a gloss suggested by v. 8). The repetition can hardly have been 
introduced by LXX on the strength oi v. 10 ; for there the name (both 
times) is not expressed by them at all. The only other similar 
duplications in OT. are Gen. 22, 11. 46, 2. Ex. 3, 4. 

5. ^?] For the dagesh, see GK. § 2 of. 

aac* 21C'] ' return, lie down'= lie down again : cf. Is. 21, 12 ^y^^ 
VrN ; and see on 2, 3. 

7. Vl^] D"it3 followed by a perfect is very rare : Tenses, §27/3 note. 

Ill- 1-13 43 

Here, the parallel n^a^ makes it probable that the narrator himself 
would have vocalized Vy,/. cf. GK. § 107°. 

8. K'?."p] ivas calling : Gen. 42, 23 ; EVV. wrongly had called. 

10. nXTT'l] Cf. the description of a nocturnal revelation in Job 4, 16. 

nysn oyaa] So 20, 25. Jud. 16, 20, 20, 30. 31. Nu. 24, it; ova 
m-n 6-/^. 18, lot; njt^n njB'3 2 Ki. 17, 4t. ny23 nys does not occur 

alone ; but (on the analogy of njC>n n:L^ 1,7) would mean one lime like 
another ■=gev\tr2i\\y : hence, with 3 prefixed, as generally, or, as we may 
substitute in a case like the present, ' as at (other) times.' 

11. nb'y ''3JX njn] ' Zo, I am doing-=.\^o, I am about to do:' the 
' futurum instans,' as often in Divine announcements, v. 13, Gen. 6, 1 7. 
Ex. 9, 3. Dt. I, 20 (see Tenses, § 135. 3; GK. § ii6p). Cf. 10, 8. 

lib. The same figure 2 Ki. 21, 12. Jer. 19, 3t. In both passages, 
the form, from ^i^V, is written njpsn (GK. § 67^). With the form here, 
cf nj''3pri; and in explanation of the hireq, see GK. § 67P. For the 
syntax of lyO'C^'^a, see Tenses, § 121, Obs. i, note; GK. § 116^^. 

12. ""^y ^n] LXX €7rt', Pesh. Targ. ^y, Vulg. adversum. h^ with 
the force of 7y: cf. on i, 12. 

IJT'n ?n] ivilh reference to his house: i, 27. 4, 19. 

'"■.??] ''D'^] ' beginning and ending,' i.e. effecting my purpose com- 
pletely. The expression occurs only here. Construction as II 8, 2 : 
Ew. § 280a; GK. § 113b. 

13. Tnjni] Read, with Klo. Bu. etc., J^'lJm (with 1 consec.) : cf v. 15^. 
"■JX DDtr] Tenses, § 135. 4. So Jer. i, i2. 38, 14 al. In Aramaic, 

the pronouns of i and 2 pers. coalesce with the ptcp. to form a new 
tense with the force of a present : but in Hebrew the two parts are 
still distinct, and the ptcp. receives some emphasis from its position. 

yT' "iti^N py2] Jiy is in the constr. state, because the following relative 
clause is conceived as defining and lirtiitiftg its meaning, exactly as 
a noun in the genitive would do: GK. § I'^o'^ foottiole; Ew. § 332°. 
But probably fiya should be omitted (the text then reading, ' Because 
("IK'N, Lex. 83t> c) he knew that his sons did curse God, etc.') : LXX 
presupposes V33 \'\V'^; and )iy3 has probably found its way in here 
from a MS. with that reading (We. Lo. al). Ehrlich regards it as an 
old error for \T- because. 

VJ3 Dn^ n'hh\>'Q '•3] The text hardly admits of being construed : for 

44 The First Book of Samuel, 

?7\> does not mean to bring a curse upon any one, and is followed not 
by a dative, but by an accusative. There can be little doubt that LXX 
oTt KaKokoyovvTi.'i ©eov have preserved the true reading, viz. Dv7pD ''3 
VJ3 DVnpX (cf. Ex. 2 2, 27 ^i?pn N^ DM^n). If the text be correct, DH^ 
can only be construed as a reflexive dative (Ew. § 315*; Lex. 515^ h) 
' cursed y^r themselves ■= at their pleasure:' cf. i/^. 44, 11 end; 80, 7 
1?D? Ijy?^ ; Job 6, 19 lO? lip. But this does not yield a satisfactory sense. 

nriD] Only here. Apparently (Nold. Mand. Granwi., p. 72 «.) 
a by-form of Syr. J)o to rebuke (sq. o i Ki. i, 6 o»^ )U JJo). In 
Mand. the form is NHD. Cf. Arab, ij^ verbis dolore affecit (Freyt.). 

14. p7] LXX ovS ovT(M% (attaching the words to v. 13), strangely 
treating pb, as though contracted from p-N^. So elsewhere, as Gen. 
4, 15 (also Pesh. Vulg. here); 30, 15 (p^ in these passages has an 
idiomatic force: cf. on 28, 2). i Ki. 22, 19. 2 Ki. i, 4. 6. 21, 12. 
22, 20 al. With i4l> cf. Is. 21, 14. 

DX] On DX after an o'^Ah,^ surely not, see GK. § 149^'°; Lex. 50* 
"IDSn''] LXX, rightly, i^tXao-Orja-eraL. The actual meanings, and 
usages, of "123 can be determined from the OT. itself : see the writer's 
art. Propitiation in DB. iv. (1902). Whether, however, as used to be 
supposed, and is assumed (though not confidently) in this art., the 
primary meaning of the root was (from Arab, ka/ara) to cover is now 
doubtful. "1Q3 corresponds to the Assyr. kuppuru, which, whether its 
primary meaning was to wipe away (Zimmern, KAT? 601 f. ; cf. Syr. 
tas), or to reynove (Langdon, Exp. Times, xxii. (1910-11), pp. 320 ff., 
380 f.) \ in actual use denotes ritual purgation (e.g. from disease); 
and the word seems to have come into Heb. from Assyrian with this 
sense attaching to it, which was there developed so as to express the 
related ideas of to expiate (or declare expiated') sin, to clear the 
offender, and to appease the offended person. See the writer's art. 
Expiation in Hastings' Encycl. of Religion and Ethics. 

15. 'In MT. ^p32 D3^!l (LXX) has been passed over after 
-ipnn-iv ' (We.). 

16. i^xiD^i'-nN] 44 MSS. better, i?Nir^t^ W. 

17. 01 nt'i;"' HD] a form of imprecation peculiar to Ruth, Samuel, 

1 For a third view (that the root meant originally to brighten, and so io purify), 
see Blimey, ib. 325 ff. ; Ball, ib. 478 f. 

///. I3-IV. I 45 

and Kings: 14, 44- 20, 13. 25, 22. II 3, 9. 35. 19, 14. Ruth i, 17. 
I Ki. 2, 23. 2 Ki. 6, 31, and with a pi. verb (in the mouth of Jezebel 
and Benhadad) i Ki. 19, 2: 20, lof. 

19. 'Jl ^>3n N^] For the idiom cf. 2 Ki. 10, 10 "" "13^0 ^S^ t^!? ^^3 
n^lX; and, in Qal, and without nv"lN, in the Deuteronomic passages 
Jos. 21, 43 (45). 23, 14. I Ki. 8, 56 : also Est. 6, 10. \0 has a partitive 
force, with a neg. = ' aught of,' as Dt. 16, 4 (Z<fx. 580^ 3 a^). 

20. '21 19^^] (was) (?«^ accredited or approved to be a prophet unto 
Yahweh. (The ptcp., not the pf ) 

N^nj^] as n^jji? 9, 16; 13, 14; i^D^ 15, i; II 2, 4 al. 

21. nN"inb] So Jud. 13, 2it, for the normal riiN"in : Stade, § 622^; 
GK. § 75c. ■ 

On the clause at the end of 2 1 (see Kittel), restored by Klo. from 
LXX, Ehrl. remarks rightly (see all the instances on 6, 12) that 
wherever the construction ^13X1 yhT\ "J^'^l occurs, the second inf. is 
always used absolutely, and is never followed by an object. 

4, I*. This should stand as the concluding clause of 3, 21. 

4, i^ — 7, I. Defeat of Israel by the Philistines. Capture and 
restoratio7t of the Ark. 

4, i^. LXX introduce this section by the words Kat iycvrjOri Iv TaZ^ 

rjfxepai'i eKetvats kol (Tvva6poi'C,ovTaL aWofjivXoi €ts ttoAc^ov ctti Io-/3ar;/\=: 

i'NnB'^ hv r\'orb'oh dti'iT^s ivap'^i onn o^n^a ^■l'1. Something of this 
sort is required, if only for the sake of explaining the following ns"ip7, 
though the clause (taken with what follows in which the same word 
occurs) would be the better for the omission of ntDnPD?. 

nryn ]2^n'] nryn is in apposition with \yif.T\ ' the stone Help ' ( Tenses, 
§ 190). In 5, I. 7, 12, however, the form used is "iTyn px, which is 
also best read here. But Eben-ezer here, and 5, i, in the plain, 
somewhere near Lydda (see the next note), can hardly be the Eben-ezer 
of 7, 12, near Mizpah, 18 m. SE. of Lydda, in the hills; or, if it is, 
there will have been different traditions as to its situation. 

pDX3] The name Apheq has not been preserved : but the Apheq 
meant must have been the one in the Sharon (Jos. 12, 18), at some 
spot, probably near Lydda or Antipatris, which would form a suitable 

46 The First Book of Sanmel, 

starting-point for an expedition either in the direction of Shiloh and 
Central Palestine, or {ch, 29, i) into the plain of Esdraelon and Gilboa 
(notice the road leading north from Lydda and Antipatris, through the 
plain of Dothan, to Jezreel ; and also those leading up east into the 
hill-country of Ephraim). Apheq is mentioned also in i Ki. 20, 23. 
See further W. R. Smith and G. A. Smith in EB. s.v, Aphek. 

2. C'tini] Perhaps, 'and spread itself abroad :' of. the Nif. in II 5, 
18. 22. LXX iKkiviv, i.e. seemingly t3J^1 'and the battle inclitied' 
(viz. in a direction adverse to Israel). Smith conjectures plausibly 
^\>3\ and the battle was hard; cf. II 2, 17 n^j? HDn^DH ^"ln1 : so Bu. 

13^] LXX, Pesh.Vulg. ^3.'V 

3-5. LXX read in v. 3 13\n^N |n^<-nx, in v. 4^ niH" pN ns (without 

nisnv), in V. 4^ in>?n (for D\n^Nn nnn jnx), and in v. 5 mn> \r\^, 

thus omitting 0^3 each time, in accordance with the general custom 
of MT. in Samuel i^v. 6. 1 1. 17-22 ; 3, 3 ; ch. 5-6 ; II 6 throughout ; 
II 15, 24^^. 25. 29 [on V. 24*a see note]). Probably it was introduced 
here into MT. at a time when the expression was in more general use 
than it had always been. 

4. DC'l] LXX, Vulg. omit DB' — no doubt, rightly. The point is 
not that Eli's sons were at Shiloh, but that they came with the ark 
into the camp (57. 11). The word may have been introduced ac- 
cidentally through a reminiscence of i, 3 (We.). 

5. pNH Dnni] I Ki. I, 45 nnpn onni : Ruth i, 19 T-yn dhdi. On 
the form E^nril , see GK. § 72I1. £3iri (usually Don), however, is to confuse, 
discotnfit, Dt. 7, 23 : what we expect is a form from nan to be in coni- 
molion, stir, of a city, i Ki. i, 41. Is. 22, 2 : so Ehrlich may be right 
in vocalizing DD^l. 

7. W^rb^ N2] The Philistines would hardly speak of Yahweh as 
' God ' absolutely : read probably Dnbx t^r^'n^^^ NB (We.). 

1i»N''l] Not to be omitted (LXX). Though the speakers are the 
same as in % the remark is of a different character : and in such cases 
the repetition of ')"inN''1 is a genuine Hebrew idiom (We.): e.g. 
26, 9-10. II 17, 7-8. 

riNtJ] LXX Toiavrrj — a Hebraism: cf. i/^. 27, 14 /xtav; 102, 19. 
119, 50. 56 avTyj; T-qv fjiovoyevrj ju,ou = "'m''n'' f. 22, 21 al. ; also Jud. 
7, 14; ij/. 32, 6; 118, 23 (Matth. 21, 42), notwithstanding the fact that 

IV. 2-13 47 

in these cases there is a subst. in the Greek to which the fern, might 
conceivably be referred. 

8. ni^xn O'lTinxn] DM^N construed as a pi. in the mouth of a heathen 
(cf. I Ki. 19, 2), as also, sometimes, in converse with one. Gen. 20, 13 
(Ew. § siS^^ end). However, this limitation is not universal : see Gen. 
35, 7 ; Jos. 24, 19 xin D-'ti^np QM^K ''3 (the plur. of majesty), II 7, 23 
(but see note) ; ^. 58, 12 (unless D\n7N here=divine beings); and in 
the phrase D''"'n D\nbN Dt. 5, 23 al. (Is. 37, 4. 17 ''n DNl^N : in poetry also 
■•n ^N is used Hos. 2, i al.). Cf. GK. §§ 124K, 13211, i45i. 

DH n7N] Gen. 25, 16 al. : Tenses, § 201. 3 ; Lex. 241^ 4. 

nao ^33] ' With every manner of smiling,' Kp., excellently. n3D is 
not a ' plague,' though it may be a wXriyrj, but rather denotes slaughter, 
V. 10. 6, 19. 19, 8. 

-lanD^l] Probably '"'5^?'' (We.) should be read. 

9. nn''\"il] carrying on . . . vni IpTnnn : GK. § ii2r. D''K^Jn!? Dn''\n^ is 
logically superfluous; but it resumes D^*k^'JX? vni after the following clause, 
in accordance with the principle noticed on 17, 13 and 25, 26. 

10. Ivnx? IJ*''N] The Versions express l^nxb: but in this phrase, 
except Jud. 20, 8 (which is not altogether parallel), the plural is 
regularly found. 

7D''")] the sing, as Jud. 12, 6t>: cf. on i, 2. 

hr^l construed with ?]^K as a collective : so ^^^ ^l^K, "133 si^SI^ etc. 

12. )C"':3-B'''X] It is the rule in Heb. (GK. § 127a), — though there 
are exceptions (§ 127®), — that a determinate gen. determines the 
preceding nomen regens : hence We. remarks here that '2 {J'''N means 
only ^ the man of B.,' — either a particular hioivn man (Nu. 25, 8. 
Jud. 7, 14. 10, i), or, more commonly, 'the vien of B.' (so i?X"i^'' 5J>''X, 
DnSN B>"'N, min'' ^t^, etc., constantly): comp. Moore on Jud. 7, 14, 
p. 207. Accordingly, as 'l ti'''N is here not determinate. We. Klo. Bu. 
Now. would read, with LXX (dv^p 'le/Aetvaios), either "'?^t?ri? ^"'^ (cf 9, 
21), or ^T^\ K'^N (II 20, i). Ehrlich, cleverly, iD^J3 for |I3^:3; cf v. 16. 

13. nsVD im (Qre T") T*] The meaningless y is corrected by the 
Massorites to *i! : but though we have ... T? 19, 3. \\i. 140, 6 ^jyD "vb ; 
... T ^y II 15, 2 -lyc^n im T ^y. Job i, 14 ; ... T ^^? II 14, 30. 
18, 4 "^yJJTl T" PS; . . ,T by itself is not used to express position 
(though such a use of it would not, it is true, be contrary to analogy : 

48 The First Book of Samuel, 

see on 2, 2() footnote). The article also (the passage being prose) is 
desiderated with TTi : so (i) the smallest change would be ynTi T^ 
nSVtD (=: Pesh.). (2) LXX irapa ttjv ttwAtjv o-kottcuwv rrjv 6S6v= Iv* 
T-nn nS^fD nyc^n (cf. Pr. 8, 3 Dnyt:> n^i? and Nah. 2, 2 ^"11 ns^): so 
We. (cf. z;. 18). (3) Targ. has NIJDO NV^n miN C'na ^y exactly as 
II 15, 2 (and also 18, 4). This rendering agrees with LXX in pre- 
supposing 'gate,' and would point to HDVO "W^'n -pi T"^ as the 
original text. The supposition that ly^^n has fallen out would most 
readily explain the absence of the art. with ill in MT. But probably 
the second of the suggested corrections is the best (so Bu. Now.). 

15. nop] VJ^y being conceived as a collective is construed with its 
predicate in the fern. smg. : so Dt. 21, 7 nasti' i^ ijn'' (Qre needlessly 
13D*ki>). i/'. 18, 35. 37, 31 initJ^X ny»n ^b. 73, 2 Kt. etc. : seeEw. § 317a; 
GK. § 145'^. The Arabic 'broken,' or collective, plural is construed 
constantly in the same way: Wright, Ar. Gr., ii. §§ 144, 146. Dp 
recurs in the same sense i Ki. 14, 4 (of Ahijah). 

16. N3n ''33X] Not ' I am come,' but ' I am he that is come' (6 rjKMv 
LXX) : surmising that Eli would expect some one with news, the 
messenger replies that he is the man. Cf. Dt. 3, 21. 8, 18. Is. 14, 27 
{Tenses, § 135. 7 ; GK. § 126!^). Notice the order '31 '•JXI. 

n^'nyon (first time)] It is an improvement to read, with LXX, Klo. 
Bu. Kit. Dh., namn the camp. 

17. IC'^Dn] The original sense of the word has been forgotten, 
and it is used for a bearer of tidings generally, even- though, as here, 
the tidings be bad ones. 

18. ND3n ^y>D] We say simply, 'fell_/r(?;« the seat:' Heb. in such 
cases says 'from upon:' so fn^t^n ^yn, nntJ^n i?yD, etc. (see Lex. 758). 

T *iy3] LXX kypix(.vo<i (cf. footnote on v. 13). We. considers *i> 
and lya to be different corruptions of an original T? : and, although 
y'1 in this sense is very rare (Job if;, 23. Zech. 4, i2t^; cf. ^yi ij/. 141, 
6), the usual idioms being Tp, ^r?^, or T"''y (see on v. 13), it seems 
that we must acquiesce In it (so Sm. Bu. Now. Kit.). 

* It is true that elsewhere LXX render compounds of T" by dva xe7f>a, or 
kxoneva : but absolute uniformity is hardly to be expected of them in such a matter 
as this, even in one and the same book. 

2 In Jer. 41, 9 NIH i^HJ lU is clearly to be read, with LXX, for NIH irT-blJ T'H . 

IV. IJ-2I 49 

1 9. nnn fem. from ['"''?.v'], of the same form as HQ^, ns;j. 

npp] An isolated example of a contracted form of the inf. nib? : 
the original [^y] becoming exceptionally rip instead of rilP, just as 
[JyiD^] the fem. of inx becomes regularly nns and not [J^TI'^J- The 
form, however, in the inf. of verbs ^'^3 is without parallel ; so that in 
all probability it is a mere transcriptional error for ^12}, the usual 
form (so GK. § 69™). 

7N] wi7k reference to, about, as z'. 21. Gen. 20, 2. i/^. 2, 7. 

ntti] the finite verb by GK. § 1141". TOJl is, however, the tense that 
would be expected (cf. on i, 12). But rii?0~^N"l and about the death 
of (^m.., with 6 MSS.) would be better Hebrew. 

nnv Tihv DSm] Dan. 10, 16; D"'T!f also Is. 13, 8. 21, 3t. Turned = 
came unexpectedly. 

20. njnmni nniD ny^l] The predicate, after a time-determination, 
being introduced by -1, as happens occasionally : 17, 57. Gen. 19, 15. 
27> 34- 37. 18 al.: Tenses, § i27y8; GK. § nib. 

iT'py] (5y (lit. <?57^r) her: cf. Gen. 18, 2 ; and see on II 15, 4. 
nap nnj^'] Ex. 7, 23. II 13, 20 al., in the same sense of vovv 
irpocr€)(€iv, ani'mum attendere. 

21. 1123 IN] "•{< is frequent as a negative in the Mishnah, and other 
post-Bibl. Hebrew, and occurs once with the same force in the OT., 
Job 22, 30 (though the text here is very suspicious) ^ It may have 
been current anciently in colloquial Hebrew. It is, however, very 
doubtful whether ' Inglorious ' is the real etym. of Ichabod : more 
probably it is a popular etymology, like those given for pp, D'^D, and 
many other names in the OT. The real meaning of 1133 ""N is uncer- 
tain; "l^n'''^ and the Sidonian b'lV^ are in appearance of the same 
formation; but their etym. is equally obscure, iryx in Nu. 26, 30, 
if the text be sound, will be a contraction of iry^N: but more 
probably it is a textual error for niyax (LXX has 'A^te^ep). 

^X-IB'^D 1133 rhl ^3] Cf. Hos. 10, 5 UDD n^J O (of the 1133 of the 
calf of Beth-el). rhl is much more than ' departed ' AV. (which 
would represent ID, as Nu. 14, 9 Xll^h^C) xh^ ID. Am. 6, 7 nmo "IDI 
DTino) : it is an ominous word in Hebrew, and expresses ' is gone 

^ It is found also in Phoenician (Cooke, NSI. 4, 4. 5, 5 ; CIS. 165, 18. 21. 
167, 11) : and it is the regular and ordinary negative in Ethiopia. 

5© 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

into exile.' It is probable that this victory of the Philistines was 
followed by that 'desolation' of Shiloh, of which, though the historical 
books are silent, the recollection was still far from forgotten in 
Jeremiah's day (7, 12. 14. 26, 6), and to which a late Psalmist alludes 
(^. 78, 60). 

5, I. mnJi'x] Ashdod, now Esdud, one of the five principal Philis- 
tine cities (6, i), 33 miles due west of Jerusalem, and about half-way 
between Joppa and Gaza, 3 miles from the sea-coast. 

2. Ji^'n] to station or stand an object (or person) : Gen. 43,9. 47, 2. 
II 6, 17 (likewise of the ark). A more definite word than D'''B'. 

3. DnntJ'N] Read Dnnc'Nn. 

mniDO] 'Though in v. 4 the purpose for which the Ashdodites 
arose early is clear from what has preceded, and need not therefore be 
specified expressly, the case in the present verse is different : and no 
doubt pjT n''3 IJ^^M must be inserted before mm with LXX. ... It will 
be best also to accept the following ^N"iM. of LXX at the same time, in 
order to follow throughout one and the same recension ' (We.). 

V^S?] to fall on ones own face, is always in Heb. either VJa ?y 
(17, 49 and often), or else Vax^ (Gen. 48, 12 al.), or VDX ijy (II 
14, 4al.); hence We.'s remark: 'For WS? here and v. 4, usage 
requires either 1''ja ^y (LXX^) or VDN7.' It is for the purpose of 
giving a rendering of the existing MT. in accordance with the general 
usage of the language that RV. marg. has the alternative ' before it,' 
the following nvT }1"iX ''3D? being regarded as an explanation of VJS^. 
But though such explanatory additions occur (Lev. 6, 8. Nu. 32, 33. 
I Ch. 4, 42. 2 Ch. 26, 14) they are exceptional, and are often under 
the suspicion of having been introduced as a gloss (Jos. i, 2 [^J3^ 
^N-|t^''' not in LXX]. Jud. 21, 7 Dnnij!?. Jer. 41, 3 [vT^siJ nx not in 
LXX]). It is better here to restore VJS 1?^. 

inpM] LXX Kttt ^yetpav, i.e. 10p*l 'and raised up :' so Sm. Bu. Dh. 
A more expressive word than 'took.' 

4. vb]} "IXK': Jin pn] 'only Dagon was left upon him' (upon Dagon), 
which can scarcely be right. LXX irXrjv 17 pd)(L^ Aaywv v-n-eXeLcfiOy] — 

' Tt is not, however, certain that LXX read VJE ?]} rather than VDX? : the 
latter is rendered by them equally inl vpoaunov avrov in 20, 41 and II 18, 28. 

V. 1-6 51 

according to We., reading probably nothing different from MT., but 
being led to pa^i? by the similarity to the Hebrew pi (We. compares 
Bpiiravov for ]2~\1 13, 2 1, irapaTeivovcra for pn3 (|ri"13) II 2, 29, l<T\apL- 
Tr;9 for "IQC^K (~13trs), II 6, 19 ; add hopa for nmN Gen. 25, 25 ; 7rr;yat 
for Cp^DS i/f. 42, 2 al., toko9 for 'n'^ (oppression) 55, 12 al., t/do<^^ for 
S)"1D III, 5, TOTTtt^tov for IS (gold) 119, 127). We. for |in would read 
^3"! (supposing the | to have arisen by dittography from "IN^J*:) ' only his 
fishy pari was left upon him.' This, however, is not very satisfactory ; 
and, as pa^ts means ' back,' and ttA-^v upon We.'s explanation remains 
unaccounted for, it is better to insert 13 back before |in, or (Lagarde) to 
read 113 his back for p:i. So Bu. Now. 

5. 13"n''] the impf., as II 5, 8. Gen. 10, 9. 22, 14 etc., expressing 
the custom. 

ntn D"l^^ iy] LXX add on i-n-ep^aLVOVTes vTr€pPaivov<Tiv=^~^^ '? 
iw^i i?"^. This may be a gloss derived from Zeph. i, 9 ; but it may 
also be a genuine part of the text. 

6. ^''1 T] Cf, with 122, v. II. Jud. i, 35 ; and with HM v. 9. 7, 13. 
12, 15. Ex. 9, 3. Dt. 2, 15. Jud. 2, 15 ; also Jos. 4, 24. Ruth i, 13. 

/N] bv would be more usual. 

DOtJ*''l] LXX KOL ltrriyay€v aurots, reading DC5J'"'1 (incorrectly) as 
^•dm : cf Ex. 15, 26. Ez. 39, 21 (We.). LXX continue : ical He^eaev 
avTOL^ CIS ras vav<;, with a variant (in Lucian's recension) Kat l^ippaa-av 
CIS ras vav9 awwv, on which see We., and Aptowitzer, ZA W. 1909, 
242 f. DDty'''1 means a«^ /a/</ ihem tvasie or desolate, — usually of places 
("A- 79; 7) 01" things (Hos. 2, 14, of vines) ; of persons Ez. 20, 26. Job 
16, 7. It is a word hardly found elsewhere, except in poetry, and the 
more elevated prose style (e.g. Lev. 26, 22. 31. 32; Ez. 30, 12. 14). 
' Destroyed ' (EVV.) is too general. But probably Ehrlich is right in 
reading DSHM. (cf. vv. 9. 11), which, as Field shews, is also presupposed 
by Aquila's e^ayeSatVto-cv (cf. 7, 10 Aq. i/^. 18, 15 Aq. Dt. 7, 23 Aq.). 

D'^PSyn] To be vocalized Qv?J?5 : the vowels of the text refer, of 
course, to the marginal Clhtpi. The traditional view of i^SJ? was that 
it denoted either the anus (cf 5, 1 2 LXX kirXriyria-av ei's ras ISpas ; 
6, 5 Vulg. quinque anos aureos), or an affection of the anus ; and hence, 
being a coarse word, the Massorites directed Cint: to be read for 
n'htiV wherever it occurs {vv. 9. 12. 6, 4. 5. Dt. 28, 27). In fact, how- 

£ 2 

52 The First Book of Samuel, 

ever, it is pretty certain that it denotes p/ague-6oi7s (RV. niarg.), which 
occur only in the groin, arm-pits, and sides of the neck. See DB. iii. 
325a ; £B. s.v. Emerods ; Exp. Times, xii. (1900-1), 378 fF., xv. (1903- 

4), 476ff. 

(TihamNI intJ^XTlN] epexeg. of DHK, but attached in a manner 
unworthy of the best Hebrew style, and probably a marginal gloss. 
LXX has instead kol fxecrov t^s x^P"^? avr^s avecfivrjo-av fJLve^, which may 
represent an original n^"}i< T]W3 Dnaay ^Sp (cf. Ex. 7, 29). On this, and 
other additions of LXX in this chapter, see more fully at the end of c/i. 6. 

7. nJ^Nl] See on i, 12. No doubt nJ:N"'1 should be restored. 

8. aD"* Jlj] For the order, which gives brightness to the style, cf. Ex. 
1, 22. Jos. 2, 16 "137 mnn, Jud. 20, 4. i Ki. 2, 26 ib nnjy, Is. 23, 12. 
52, 4. Jer. 2, 10 ; also (where the position is emphatic) i Ki. 12, i. Jer. 
20, 6. 32, 5. At the end of the v. ri3 (LXX eis V€$Oa) seems to be 
desiderated. On the site of Gath, see p. 57. 

9. "inon nnx] nCN nnx occurs frequently : nnN with a pf. without 
"IB'N (GK. § i64<i) only here and Lev. 25, 48. nnS' standing alone is 
elsewhere construed with an inf. constr. 

n?Dino] confusion, panic, v. 11. 14, 20. Dt. 7, 23 ('discomfiture'). 

nn'^''l] AV. follows the Jewish interpreters (Rashi DnriDJn JTin n30 : 
Kimchi D''3S2D nnO D1p03 DninUH n3» ; cf. LXX Kttt cTrarafev avTOi»s 
€is Tas eSpas ai'Twv, Symm. ets to, KpvTTTa avTwv) in treating this as 
equivalent to 1"'ri;^'l^ There is no difficulty in supposing tr to be 
written for D : but the meaning assigned to the Nf> is not a possible 
one. In Arabic^^ means io have inverted (or cracked) eyelids or lower 
lips : if the text, therefore, be correct, it is probable that inb' is de- 
rived from a root signifying properly to cleave, and applied in Hebrew 
and Arabic to different affections of the skin. Render ' and plague- 
boils brake out to them ' {Anglice ' upon them ') ^ 

^ The same explanation is implied elsewhere : the passage is quoted in a 
Massoretic list of eighteen words written once with K' in lieu of the normal D : 
Afass. Magna on Hos. 2, 8 ; see also Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 191 ; and ib. p. 42. 
Amongst the passages cited is Hos. 8, 4 IT'^Tt = IT'DH (RV. marg.). 

" Pesh. has here a doublet: see PS. Tkes. cols. 2757, 4309. Nestle {ZAW. 
1909, p. 232), following the second of these, .Oo^lo.^ Q-.»]^/ (= Aq. 
TrfpuXvOrjaav al tSpai), would read 1"intJ'''1, a Hithp. from HIK' to loose: but as 
D vDy does not mean e8pai, this yields no sense. In illustration of the clause 

V. 6-VI. 3 53 

C^Dy] i.e. V?y : Qre Cintp; see on v. 6. 

lo. \'\'\\>'!^^ 12 miles NE. of Ashdod, and 12 miles NW. of Beth- 
shemesh (see on 6, 13). 

^^JN] to me, spoken in the name of the people as a whole. So often : 
as Ex. 17, 3^^. Nu. 20, 18. 19^. 21,22. Jos. 9, 7 (' perhaps thou dwell- 
est in ??iy midst,' said by Israel to the ambassadors from Gibeon). 
17, 14. Jud. u, 17. 19 e7id; 12, 3*^. 20, 23b. Hab. 3, 14 ('to scatter 
7}ie'). Comp. on 30, 22 ; and LOT. 366 f, (edd. 6-8, 390). 

^Dy HNl "jrT'On^] In the best Hebrew style this would be expressed 
"iioy nxi ^nx n^'arh (as v.n; Ex. 17, 3 ; II 14, 16). The same com- 
bination occurs, however, eleven or twelve times in the course of the 
OT. : Dt. II, 6 (contrast Nu. 16, 32). 15, 16. Jos. 10, 30^. 32. 33. 37. 
39. 2 Ki. 20, 6 (=Is. 38, 6). Jer. 32, 29. Ez. 29, 4 (Keil). Zech, 5, 4, 
Est. 2, 9 ; cf. 2 Ch. 28, 2'^. Comp. Hitzig on Is. 29, 7. 

12^. Ex. 2, 23 D'^n^sn ^N nnyiK' bvT\\ — the only other passage in 
which nyiK' occurs in prose. 

6, I . D''JJ'nn] LXX adds koI iii^eaev rj yrj avTwy /xt'as = '^^")^^ 

nnasy ni'T^ (cf. Ex. 7, 28). See at the end of the chapter. 

2. D"'0Dp7] On DDp as well as on the other principal words used by 
the Hebrews to denote divination and magic, the study of W. Robert- 
son Smith in the Journal of Philology, xiii. p. 273 ff., xiv. p. 113 ff. 
should be consulted. See also the writer's notes on Dt. 18, 10. 11, 

nD3] ivherewiih ? as IMic. 6, 6 (Keil). 

3. D"'ni'B'» DN] LXX, Pesh. CriX DTii?B>D DS. Analogy certainly 
demands the insertion of the subject ; see especially the similarly 
framed sentences, Jud. 9, 15. 11, 9. Jer. 42, 13 {Tenses, § 137): with 
the ptcp. the subject is omitted only when it is indefinite, or when it 
has been mentioned just previously {ib. § 135. 6; cf. GK. § ii6^'*'). 

ITti^n] return, render as a due (dTroSowat) : Nu. 5, 7 ; if/. ^ 2, 10 
)y^ nmo : 2 Ki. 3, 4 (of Mesha's annual tribute to Israel), etc. 

DB'N] AV. trespass-offering, RV. gtiilt-offeruig (regularly, except 
Is. 53, 10, where AV. is not altered, but the correct rendering is given 
in the margin). On the nature of the DJi'N see Oehler, Theol. of 
O.T., § 137, who shews that the cases in which the 'guilt-offering' is 

following in LXX and Vulg., see the curious Midrash {Midr. Sam. x. 4) cited by 
Aptowitzer, ZAJV. 1909, p. 242, 

54 The First Book oj Samuel, 

prescribed in the Priests' Code always imply some infringement of 
another's rights, — either a positive injury done, or some right or due 
withheld. Doubtless DJ^'X is used here in a more popular and general 
sense ; still, the offering of the Philistines is designed as a compensa- 
tion for the wrong which they conceive has been done to the ark whilst 
in their territory. 

4. '31 nson] ^ by, according to, the number of,' an accus. of limitation 
or definition. Cf. v. 18. Ex. 16, 16. Job i, 5; also II 21, 20; and 
Ew. §§ 204^, 300c ; GK. § iiSb. 

'h^i\ i.e. \?sy. The Massorites mean vby to be read ^"inD ; cf. on 5, 6. 
nb^] either ^b) (8 Heb. MSS.) or t^f> (LXX, Pesh.) must 
evidently be read. 

5. DS^^Sy] i. e. D?\^sy : Qrg D3nnt3. V. 5a (We.), or at least the 
words }*"lNn HN DTlTlB'cn (Dhorme), seems to be a redactional gloss : 
see p. 61. 

m33 . , . OnnJl] Jos. 7, 19 : and, differently, Jer. 13, 16. 

D3''^yo . . . ^p''] ''Pv' is construed similarly i Ki. 12, 10. Jon. i, 5. 

6. inaDri make the heart heavy, i.e. slow to move or o^^c/, unimpres- 
siojtable. It is the word used by J {Qal and Hif.) in the narrative of 
the plagues, Ex. 7, 14. 8,11. 28. 9,7. 34. 10, i. Comp. the writer's 
Exodus in the Camhr. Bible, p. 53. 

^^ynn] So Ex. 10, 2. Not 'wrought wonderfully,' but ' made a toy 
of (cf. RV. marg.); see on 31, 4. 

n^rhm . . . iK^xa] So 12, 8 : see on 4, 20. 

7. nnx] The numeral has here a weaker sense than in i, i, and is 
scarcely more than a; cf. Ex. 16, 33; ch. 7, 9. 12, i Ki. 19, 4. 22, 9. 
2 Ki. 7, 8. 8, 6. 12, 10. 

Drripy] the wa^r. suff., according to GK. § 135"; cf. z'. 10. 

8. ^2"iN2] It is possible, of course, that an mx may have formed 
a regular appendage to an nbjy, in which case the art. will be prefixed 
to it as denoting an object expected, under the circumstances named, 
to exist (so probably 2, i-^ the prong : 18, 16^ the spear, almost = his 
spear: 25, 23 "licnn; II 13, 9 niEJ'cn-nN , etc.); but there are many 
passages to which this explanation will not apply, and the rendering 
' a chest ' is perfectly in accordance with Hebrew idiom. See more 
fully on I, 4 and 19, 13. 

VI. 4-12 55 

9- 1^13J Til] the way to, etc., as regularly (Gen. 3, 24). On the 
position of 1^U3 "Jil, immediately after DN, see p. 35. 

.'Iji? n"'n Nin rripo] 'it is an accident (which) hath befallen us' 

IT" N^] Notice the unusual order, intended to emphasize IT : cf. 
Gen. 45, 8. Nu. 16, 29 '•jn^C' ''• n^ 'Not Y. hath sent me' (but some 
one else). y\r. 115, 17. Cf. GK. § 1526; Lex. 518^ (f). 

10. DliDX^l] On the n-, see GK. § ()(^. 

lb] from n^3 with the sense of i<^3 (GK. § 75^^): cf. ^3^153 25, 33. 

11. 'And they set the ark of Yahweh upon the cart, and also the 
coffer.' The type of sentence is one not uncommon in Hebrew (e.g. 
Gen. 12, 17. 34, 29, 43, 15. Nu. 13, 23^). 

Some few of the instances that occur might be explained as due to the com- 
posite character of the narrative (so Nu. 13, 36**) ; but this does not appear to be 
the case in most : and it must be recognized as a feature of Hebrew style, when 
two subjects (or objects) have to be combined in one clause, for the clause 
containing one of the subjects (or objects) to be completed, the other being 
attached subsequently. See a. Geo. 2, 9*. 41, 27*. Ex. 35, 22. Lev. 22, 4. Nu. 16, 2*. 
iS"*. 27^ Jud. 6,5* D.-fSnXI I^V Dn''3pD1 on "-i. 2 Ki. 6, 15: b. Gen. i, i6^ 

12,17 iJT'n ns'i D^^n: u^Vi^ nyis ns ^'"^ y^yi. 34.29- 43,15-18. Ex. 29, 3. 

Jud. 21, 10''. I Ki. 5, 9. Jer. 27, 7*. 32, 29 : c. (analogous examples with preposi- 
tions) Gen. 28,14^. Ex. 34,27" ^XICT'' HSI Jinn inN "ma. I)t. 7,14". 28,46. 
54* 1ND J:yni "ja 1"in t^'-Sn. 56*. Jer. 25, 12 MT. 40,9*. The word attached 
cannot, in all such cases, be treated (Evv. § 339*) as subordinate. 

12. n3"iSi'''l] (a) The 3 pi. fem. with the prefix ^ as Gen. 30, 38. 
Dan. 8, 2 2t. In Hebrew, except in these three passages, the form of 
the 3 pi. fem. is always nj^nsn : in Arabic, on the other hand, as also 
in Aramaic and Ethiopic, it is regularly yaktubna, and the form 
iaktiihjia is noted only as a rare dialectical variety (Stade, § 534^^; GK. 
§ 47^^). The most original form w^ould seem certainly to hQ yakiubna 
(2 pi. innan, nj^n^n: 3 pi. 13n^^ njnna''): tak/ubna appears to have been 
produced through the influence of the 3rd fem. sing. ariDD. The latter 
form, however, came to predominate in Hebrew, while in Arabic it 
only prevailed dialectically. 

* In illustration of the recourse to the guidance of an animal in cases of doubt, 
see Wellh. Reste Arab. Heidentumes (1887), p. 147, ed. 2 (1897), p. 201. 

* See Fleischer, Kkinere Schriflen/i. 1 (1885), p. 99. 

56 The First Book of Samuel, 

{h) nJiE'l'l (with dagesh and short hireq) stands for a normal ninB'"'?1 : 
cf. ri?!l I Ki. 3, 15 for n^^M: Stade, § 121; GK. § 71. 

12^. The main division is at ti'DK' T^l, the ^rj/ occurrence of the 
zaqe/{s&e on i, 28): what follows is a circumstantial clause, attached 
do-w8cT(jDs, defining more particularly how the kine went along (cf. 
I Ki. 18, 6, and Tenses, § 163). On Beth-shemesh, see p. 57. 

nns] is here emphatic : the kine went along 07ie highway, without 
attempting to deviate from it. 

W1 l^n 13^n] Exactly so (except that sometimes there is a ptcp. for 
the finite verb) Gen. 8, 5 (rd. 13pn for the wholly irregular Vn). Jos. 6, 
9. 13^ Qre. Jud. 14, 9. II 3, 16. 2 Ki. 2, 11 ("isni !]'^n D^pJ'h)! 1 : 
with the verb at the end, Is. 3, 16 njiiri filSDI T)i?n. Jer. 50, 4t : 
with the verb in the middle, \^. 126, 6 nb2^ "iQ^^ "ipn. And with an 
impf. with zvazv consec. for the second inf. abs. c/i. 19, 23. II 16, i3t; 
with a pf. with waw consec. (frequentative) in the same place, II 13, 19 
(see note). Jos. 6, 13*1. Cf. GK. § 11 38. Comp. an analogous idiom 
with an adj. (but see note) on 14, 19. iya for nya, GK. § 751. 

There is another type, occurring twice, viz. Gen. 8, 3 yt^) "IvH D'){J*''1. 12, 9 
yiDJI '])bn VD'T t. 

With other verbs we have, of the type lyjl "Jl^n ']b'^), Gen. 8, 7 nb'l N^X'' N;^*1 . 

II 15, 30 nbni ribv t>V). i Ki. 20, 37. 2 Ki. 3, 24 (rd. with Luc. nani xn ^iNnji). 

21, 13" (rd. Vsni/nhO). Is. 19, 22 NiS-11 Pfij . . . f\:j). 31, 5 (rd. ^Jfm and 

n\^»n")). Jer. 12, 17. Ez. 1, 14 (rd. Db*! N^;j n;^'; ni>nn hi3''ni). joei 2,26't. 

And'of the type 3b'l '^^bn UIK^M : Jer. 7,13 121) D3K^n . » . "l^nXI; and 
similarly, always with DSK'n , 7,25. 11,7. 25,3.4. 26,5.19, 32,33 (rd, HDPNI 
for the first ntD^). 35> M- I5- 44> 4- 2 Ch. 36, I5t. 

13. Dnxp K'DK' n^2i] GK. § 145c. Cf. II 15, 23. 

poya] An pcy, lit. deepening, is a ' highlander's term ' for a broad 
depression between hills, especially for a ' wide avenue running up into 
a mountainous country, like the Vale of Elah [see on 17, 2], the Vale of 
Hebron, and the Vale of Aijalon' (G. A. Smith, H. G., 384 f., 654 f. ; cf. 
the writer's art. in DB. iv. 846 with list of Cpoy mentioned in the OT.). 
Here it denotes {EB. s.v. Beth-shemesh) ' the broad, and beautiful, 
and still well-cultivated Wady es-Sarar ' {EB. i. 567), up which the 

1 Jer. 41, 6 riDb^ "^bl "iQl . , . i<if]'_1 is anomalous; we should expect , , , NX"'') 
r\2yi T]"^n •qbn Xini. Duhm, Comill read, after LXX, nb21 T]"!?n W^brs Dni. 

VI. i2-i8 57 

railway now climbs from Jaffa to Jerusalem. Beth-shemesh is now 'A in 
Shems, 917 feet above the sea, on the slope of the hills on the S. of this 
Wady, 12 miles SE. ofEqron, and 14 miles W. of Jerusalem. The Wady 
opens out on the N. of it, with Zor'ah (Jud. 13, 2 etc.) now Sarah, 
2 miles to the N., on the hills on the opposite (N.) side of the Wady. 

niNI?] LXX CIS aTrdvTrjcriv avTrj'; =■ iriN^pp. Though DIXI? is not 
ungrammatical, yet the pregnant construction insip^ \nt2^^\ is so 
much more forcible and idiomatic (Jud. 19, 3 inN"ip^ no:j''>1 : also with 
other verbs, as 14, 5 iriNlpb JNK' ; ch. 16, 4 inx-lp^ mn^l; 21, 2) that 
it decidedly deserves the preference. 

14. ''5J'DK'n~n''3] Formed according to the regular custom when the 
gentile adj. or patronymic of a compound name is defined by the art. : 
so ^joni'n-nn (16, i), ^^Nn-n>3 (i Ki. 16, 34), niyn-^nx (Jud. 6, n). 

ly-iS^', Apparently (on account of the discrepancy between v. 18^ 
and V. 4) not part of the original narrative : see p. 61. V. i8t> will then 
continue v. 16. 

1 7. nry] The most south-westerly of the Philistine cities, the last 
town in Palestine on the route to Egypt. Ashkelon was on the sea- 
coast, 12 miles north of it. The site of Gath is not certain (Buhl, 
196; G. A. Smith, H. G. 196); but it was not improbably Tell es- 
Sdfiyeh, the collis clarus of William of Tyre, and the fortress Blanca 
guarda, or Blanchegarde, of the Crusaders, now a mud village, on the 
top of a projecting limestone rock, with conspicuous white cliffs, 
300 feet high, looking down towards Ashkelon, 1 2 miles to the WNW. 
(see view in Conder, Tent Work in Palestine, ed. 1887, p. 273: see 
also p. 275 f.; H. G. 196, 226 f.; Cheyne, art. Gath in EB>j. 

18. D''J")Dn DK'Dn?] belonging /o the five lords: 'b as 14, 16. 

'V\ n^yo] A similar delimitation in 2 Ki. 1 7, 9 = 1 8, 8 ^ni»D 
"iif20 T-y ny Qi-iVIJ. "•Ht'l' = men of the open country, country-folk : 
cf. Dt. 3, 5 "PEn ^^-^ cities of the countryfolk: Zech. 2, 8 nM"iSl 
DPB'n' ntJ'ri Jerusalem shall sit (metaph. = be inhabited) as open 
country districts. 

nbnjn bas iyi] 73K ineadow gives no sense here. We must 
evidently read pX (see v. 15) with LXX, Targ., and for nj?) either 
•Tiyi (see Jos. 24, 27. Gen. 31, 52) or (see Jud. 6, 24) niVI: then, 
placing a full stop at the end of 1 8*, we shall get ' And the great 

58 The First Book of Samuel, 

stone, upon which they set etc., is a witness [or, is still~\ to this day in 
the field of Joshua the Beth-shemeshite.' The stone on which the ark 
was set was still shewn in the field of Joshua at Beth-shemesh; and it is 
appealed to by the narrator as evidence of the facts which he relates. 

rh^:^T] px] The use of the art. with the adj. when the subst. is 
without it, is rare in classical Hebrew, being mostly restricted to cases 
in which the subst. is a word which may be regarded as defining itself 
(DV Gen, I, 31. 2, 3. Ex. 20, 10 al., "ivn i Ki. 7, 8. 12. Ez, 40, 28; 
nVB' Ez. 9, 2. Zech. 14, 10), and even then being exceptional. The 
instances have been analysed by the present writer in Tenses, § 209 ; 
of GK. § i2 6"'» -^. Examples of a more exceptional type are ch. 12, 23. 
16, 23. II 12, 4. 21, 19. Jer. 6, 20. 17, 2. 

In/^5/-Biblical Hebrew this construction became more common : in the Mishnah 
there are some forty instances (including some standing ones, as nPHJin 0033 ' the 
Great Synagogue,' PppSH "litJ' ' the ox to be stoned '), but mostly in cases where 
(according to Segs\,JQR. 1908, pp. ^6^-66'] = Misnaic Hebrew, 1909, pp. 19-21) 
some eviphasis rests upon the attribute, as contrasted with something different. 

Here it is best to restore the art. ('21 rh\^f\ |3Sn [or lj?1] rn^S), 
19. In this verse as it stands in MT. there must be some error, 
though it is not possible to restore the text with entire certainty. 
(i) '1 nxT does not mean (AV.) to look into (which would be rather 
Tin ^N riNl), but to look on or at, sometimes with satisfaction and 
pleasure (1/^. 27, 13), at other times with interest and attention (Cant. 
6, II to look upon the green plants of the valley: Ez. 21, 26 he looked 
a/ the liver: Qoh. 11, 4 D"'3y3 HN") he that looketh at the clouds: 
Gen. 34, I : Jud. 16, 27 end): if, therefore, the expression be used 
here in a bad sense, it will signify to gaze at, viz. with an unbecoming 
interest (so We. Kp. Stade, Gesch. i. 204). (2) The number of those 
smitten is incredible in itself; and the juxtaposition of D''K>ttn without 
\ is another indication of error\ It is true, both numbers are in 
LXX: but there they are even more out of the question than in MT.; 
for LXX limits the slaughter to the sons of Jechoniah (ona for DV2) ! 
Josephus speaks of the number smitten as only seventy ; and modern 
scholars generally (including Keil) reject {J"'X fj^N W'^'Cn as a gloss, 

^ These are some examples of the repetition of TWi^ , with similar ascending 
numeration, Gen. 5, 8. 10. 13 al., but none without 1. 

VI. i8-2i 


though how it found its way into the text must remain matter of 

(3) Instead of ^iTO^ JT'n ''ti>3Nn y\ LXX has the remarkable reading 
Kal ouK T|(T|i€ViCTai' 01 oioi 'lexoi'iou eV rois avhpaa-LV Bai^o-a/ius, the 
originality of which speaks strongly in its favour. Unfortunately 
d(rfjL€vi(oi does not occur elsewhere in LXX., so that it cannot be 
ascertained definitely what Hebrew word it may here express. It is 
not probable that such an unusual word would have been chosen to 
render a common term like inotJ' (which indeed in 57. 13 is represented 
by the ordinary cv^patVco-^ai). We. suggests in''J3'> 133 Ip^ N7I, i.e. 'And 
the sons of Jechoniah caz/ie not off guiltless, were not unpunished, 
among the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had gazed at the ark of 
Yahweh ; and he smote among them (onn for nj;2, as LXX) seventy 
men ' (so Now.). Klostermann suggests the rare ^in (Ex. 18, 9) for 
rja-fxevio-av : ' And the sons of Jechoniah rejoiced not among the men 
of Beth-shemesh, when {or because) they looked upon the ark of Yah- 
weh' ' (so Sm. Bu.). Whatever be the verb to which ^o-/*. corresponds, 
the adoption of the LXX reading effects a material improvement in 
the style of the verse : in MT. Dy3 ■]"'1 follows awkwardly upon "i^l 
{J'0tJ'"n''3 '^m^l, and is in fact tautologous, whereas onn T^l of LXX 
refers naturally and consistently to the sons of Jechoniah before men- 
tioned. The first T"i in MT., on the other hand, must be just the 
mutilated remnant of the clause preserved in LXX ^ 

20. IJipyo] more than M'O'Ci^—from upon us, from off us, so as to 
relieve us of its presence: cf. II 13, 17. 20, 21. 22. i Ki. 15, 19. 
2 Ki. 12, 19^ 18, 14. Nu. 21, 7. 

21. ni] The site of Qiryath-ye'arim is not certain, as the name has 
not been preserved: but it was most probably (Robinson; EB. s.v. ; 
cf. G. A. Smith, H. G. 226) at Qaryet el- Enab (the ' City of grapes'), 
9-10 miles NE. of Beth-shemesh, and 7 miles NW. of Jerusalem, 
among the hills, 2385 ft. above the sea. Beth-shemesh (see on v. 13) 
was much lower : hence ' come down ' (notice ' went down,' of the 

' Ew. Then, understand the passage similarly, though they read the less pro- 
bable ino'^ N^. 

^ Vulg. represents the first {^""N by viros, the second hy plebis : cf. Targ., and 
Jerus. Sank. II 4 (20'' 62), as cited by Aptow. ZAW. 1909, p. 243. 

6o 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

border from Qiryath-ye'arim to Beth-shemesh, in Josh. 15, io)\ 
Topographical distinctions are always carefully observed by the Hebrew 
writers. Let the reader study, with this point of view in his mind, the 
history of Samson (Jud. 13-16). 

7, I. nynn] Read, probably, with 55 MSS., LXX, Pesh., Targ., 
and II 6, 3 ny353 "IIJ'N. 

In ch. 6, MT. presents two difficulties: (i) the abrupt mention of 
the mice in 57. 4 : (2) the disagreement between vv. 4 and 18 in the 
number of images of mice — v. 18 speaking of an indefinite number 
(one for each town and village), v. 4 only of five. At first sight, LXX 
appears to remove these difficulties: for (i) the mention of the mice in 
V. 4 is prepared by tvv'o notices describing a plague of mice '^ in the 
country in 5, 6 (D^IN IIDI nn33y l^yi) and 6, i (DnnSJ? r]'i'\^ D!;">Nl) ; 
and (2) whereas in MT. 6, 5^ is little more than a repetition of v. 4, 
in LXX V. 4 is confined to the DvSy, v. 5 to the mice, not, however, 
limited to five, but an unspecified number (4^ Kal etirav, Kar' apiOfjiov 
Tcov (raTpaTTWv twv dAAo^vAwv Trevre cSjoas xpvcra.'i, ori TTTOia-fia tv vfuv 
Ktti TOts ap)(ov(TLV Vfxwv KUL Tw Aao), 5* KaL fJivs )(pvcrov<; ofxoLoifxa twv /avcuv 
TWV StacfiOeipovToyu tt/v y^v). The additions of LXX in 5, 6, 6, i, and 
the redistribution of the DvQj/ and the mice in vv. 4-5, are accepted 
by Thenius. 

We. takes a different view. He argues with great force that vv. 4-5 
MT. is right: the last clause o^v. 4, 'for one plague was on you all, 
and on your lords,' he points out, is intended to explain that, although 
only f/iree districts (Ashdod, Gath, and Eqron) were implicated in 
what had happened to the ark, a/i had suffered through the plague, 
and a/I must accordingly share in the DK'N : the number Jive being 
thus chosen, as representing Philistia as a whole, it was sufficient for 
the mice as well as for the DvDJ/ ; and the cogency of the argument, 

1 Conder's site {DB. s.v.) at 'Erma, 4 miles E. of Beth-shemesh, up the 
W. Ismaiii, is much less probable (cf. Buhl, Geogr. 167 «.). Notice (i) that there 
is no sufficient reason for supposing ' mount Ye'arim ' (' mount of the woods ') to 
have been contiguous to Qiryath-ye'arim ; and (2) in so far as the identification 
rests upon the resemblance of 'Erma with Ye'arim, that the m is radical in one 
word, and merely the mark of the plural in the other. 

2 On the destructiveness of field-mice, see Arist. Hist. Nat. vi. 37, p. 580'', 
15-20, who relates how they would sometimes in harvest time appear suddenly in 
unspeakable numbers, and destroy a crop entirely in a single night. 

VII. 1-2 6i 

'for one plague' etc., would be just destroyed, if it were to be applied 
to the number of the hh^V alone. He concludes that 6, 4-5, as read in 
LXX, have been corrected for the purpose of agreeing with z'. 18 ; and 
accepting vv. 4-5 MT., he rejects v. iS^^ (to TSn), and with it v. i^j, 
as inconsistent (in the number of golden mice offered) with v. 4 '. 

As regards the further point, the abrupt mention of the mice in 
V. 4, he considers the difficulty as apparent merely : the mice, he 
argues, are mentioned not because there had been a plague of them, 
but as emblems of a pestilence'^ : the double Dt^X, Hke the double dream 
in Gen. 41, 25, relates to one and the same object, viz. the plague 
of D"'i'Qy : and v. 5* is a redactional gloss ^ due to the supposition that 
V. 4 implied that there had been a plague of mice. And accordingly 
he rejects the additions of LXX in 5, 6. 6, i, as made merely for the 
purpose of relieving the apparent difficulty of vv. 4-5, on the theory 
that these verses pre-supposed an actual plague of mice. He admits, 
however, justly, that if this explanation of the ' mice ' in 57. 4 be not 
accepted, there is no alternative but to treat the additions in question 
as a genuine part of the original text. 

7, 2-17. SamueV s judgeship. Defeat of Philistines at Eben-ezer. 

2. 'V\ n''D\"l n"l''"l] that the days were multiplied (Gen. 38, 12), and 
became twenty years. Not as EVV. 

inj"'l] Only here, nn: in Heb. means to mourn or lament (Ez. 32, 
1 8) : so, if the reading be correct, it w'ill be most safely explained 
as a pregn. constr., mourned or sighed after Yahweh = went after 
Him mourning or sighing (for the Nif. cf. mN3) *. It is doubtful if 

^ The attempt has been made to reconcile vv. 4 and 18 by supposing v. 4 to 
relate the proposal of the priests, and w. 18 to describe what was actually done. 
But had the proposal not been adopted as it was first made, it is natural to suppose 
that this would have been in some manner indicated: as it is, the phrase in z'. 10 
is And the men did so. 

^ Comp. the fonn in which the story of the destruction of Sennacherib's army 
reached Herodotus (2. 141) : field-mice gnawing the leathern thongs of the soldiers' 
bows and shields. 

' So in his Composition des Hex. tend der hist. Biicher"^ (1889), p. 241. 

* So Ewald, Hist. ii. 602 (E. T. 427). Jop is cited by the Syriac lexico- 
graphers (PS. col. 2294) with the meaning ingemuit. 

In Eth. the corresponding verb means recreari, respirare, in the causative conj. 
(II. i) to console, in the reflexive (III. 3) to console oneself (sc. by confession, as 
Lev. 16, 21) ; Dillm. col. 632. 

62 The First Book of Samuel^ 

Ges. is right in rendering were gathered. It is true that \13nN occurs in 
Targ. in a connexion which implies gathering, but it is always used 
with reference to some religious object, being often followed by inPID? 
>">^ or '•"^ n^SD^, so that it is doubtful if it expresses to be gathered 

simply. Thus ch. \2, li, jiDH^N -""n wnhs) nn3 . . . pmnni for 
"'"'' ins ^^^: Jer. 3, 17 '•"••n NotJ'i' . . . ni n^ao^ pnin-'i: 30, 21 
"jn^JiD^ pni's'^i: 31, 22b snniNn pmn^ ^x-lE^'"| n-n Noyi: 33, 13 
Nn^tj'rD n't ^y NDj? pnin"" (for n3i» n^ ^y njnnyn); Hos. 2, 17 pnjJT'i 

nD^»b pn, 18 ^Jnhsi? pnjn^l, similarly 3, 3. 5. The use of pytJ 
to be called together is not parallel: for nnj is not a synonym of pyT. 
Probably the Targumic usage is merely based upon the Hebrew word 
occurring in this passage, and the sense which it was there presumed 
to have, and cannot therefore be regarded as i?idependefit evidence 
of its meaning. Whether, however, inj'"! is correct, is very doubtful. 
LXX have iTre/SXeij/e, whence We. conjectured I^S?! (cf. Ez. 29, 16); 
but perhaps ^^)\ (Klo. Bu.) is better; cf. i Ki. 2, 28; and (with 3.^) 
Jud. 9, 3. As Ehrlich justly remarks, nn^''"! (Is. 2, 2 = Mic. 4, i ; Jer. 
31, 12. 51, 44t) ap. Kittel is much too poetical for the present con- 
text: but his own ViT'l (12, 14) does not read very well after VIT'I 
just before. 

3. 'Jl ITDn] The same phrase in Gen. 35, 2. 4; Jos. 24, 23; 
Jud. 10, 16. "133 Ton is lit. gods offoreign-ness {:= foreign gods): so 
"133 (''33) p = foreigner{s). 

13''3n] ?fmke firm, fix; cf. Job 11, 13. \\i. 78, 8. i Ch. 29, 18 
(T^5< 033^ |3n^). 2 Ch. 12, 14 ah Comp. |i33 fixed, of the heart, x\f. 
57> 8. 78, 37, and p33 nn ^firm, unwavering, spirit, 51, 12. 

niri^y] The pi. of rinriK'i?, as the name is vocalized by the 
Massorites : but the Gk. 'AardpTrj (cf. also the Ass. Ishtar) make it 
practically certain that the real pronunciation was 'Ashtart, nnhK'y 
(like ^^1^ for Alilk) having been chosen for the purpose of suggesting 
TiK'S shame (cf. on II 4, 4). nnriK^y is mentioned frequently in 
Phoenician inscriptions, often by the side of Baal. Thus Cooke, 
NSI. No. 5 (the Inscription of Eshmun'azar of Sidon), 1. i4f. ^dxi 
|n3n mnti'y n3n3 mnrjJDX and my mother Am'ashtart, priestess of 
'Ashtart our lady; (1. I7f.) D> pS nX3 D31V ]bi6 Dn3 p3 tt'N |n3N1 
by3 DB' mntJ'j;^ n31 p:; ijVS^ n3 and we are they who have built 

VII. 3 63 

temples [0^^-?] to the gods of the Sidonians in Sidon, the sea country, 
a temple [n^a] to Ba'al of Sidon, and a temple to 'Ashtart, the name of 
Ba'al; 6, 5 ; 13, 3 (from Kition in Cyprus) an image [n70D]^ erected 
by one Yaash niriK'V^ Tini^ to her lady, to'Ashtart; 38, 3 (from 
Gaulus, i.e. Malta) Tr\T\m T\1 ^npD the sanctuary of the temple of 
'Ashtart; 45, i (from Carthage); CIS.\.\. 135, i; 140, i mnti'y^ 
[nc'Jm nnro T"1S* to 'Ashtart of Eryx^ an altar of bronze; 255 (from 
Carthage) mnsn nint^y nay mpbciny 'Abdmelqart, servant of 
'Ashtart the glorious ; 263 (do.) t^'N fon ^yn^ pN^i ^yn |Q njn^ nnn^ 
mnt^'y k'k noyn k's nina'yox [nnj] to the lady Tanith, the face 
[probably = revelation] of Baal, and to the lord Baal Hamman, which 
[TjJ'X] Am'ashtart, who was in the congregation of the men \p^^ 
of 'Ashtart (i.e. among the people attached to her temple), vowed. 
In Sidon 'Ashtart appears to have been the presiding goddess (cf. 
I Ki. ir, 5. 33 Onv ^^bx mnt^'y): in Tyre she was subordinated to 
Melqart (mp^c). A temple of 'Ashtart in the Philistine town of 
Ashqelon is mentioned in 31, 10 (see the note). The worship 
of 'Ashtart was very widely diffused : see particulars in the articles 
cited on p. d/^ footnote ; and cf. Head, Hist. Numorum^, Itidex, p. 941^. 
mnt:>ynj The 'Ashtoreths will denote either images of 'Ashtart, 
or (preferably) the goddesses of that name which were worshipped 
in different localities, just as Dvyan v. 4 are the local or other special 
Ba'als: cf. p^ ^Jyn just cited; pn^ ^y3 Cooke, No. 54 a; yi ^y3 
36, I ; t"in ^y3 Baal of Tarsus on coins of that city, Gesenius, Monu- 
menta Phoenicia, p. 276 f., and Plate 36, VII. VIII. A, B, C, Cooke, 
pp. 343-346, Yl^diA, Hist. Numorum, pp. 615, 616^; DOB' ?y2 Baal of 
heaven, Cooke, 9, and often : pn ^y3 Baal Hamman, of uncertain 
meaning {^EB. i. 402; Paton, as cited, p. 64 n., p. 287 f.), constantly 
on the Punic votive tablets from N. Africa, Cooke, p. 104; NDIO ?y3 
(apparently) Baal the Healer, CIS. I. i. 41 (from Kition) ; BaX/xap/cws 
or BaA./AapKO)Sos, i.e. HplD 7y3 Baal of dances, in inscriptions from 
the site of an ancient temple at Deir el Kal'a in the neighbourhood 

' Heb. pDD (Ez. 8,3.5), oi\.tn (masc. and fem.) in Phoenician inscriptions: 
e.g. Cooke, 13, 2 ; 23, 2-5 ; 25, i ; comp. above, p. 34 note. 
^ ' Erycina ridens,' Hor. Carm. i. 2. 33. 
3 Ed. 2 (191 1), pp. 731 f., 816. 

64 The First Book of Samuel, 

of Beyrouth And in the OT. itself, ni^D ^ya, nn3 ijya, nnr ^yn, 

and, as preserved in names of places, *13 ^y3 -5ca/ ^ Fortune, h'^l 

jiyD, niya ba (in Hos. 9, 10), pav ^yn, etc.^ ; cf. on II 5, 20. 

On the position of nnriK'yni (separated from I33n \ni5N, and after 
D3!3inD), cf. on 6, II. 

7^''l] //^fl/ /^^ may, or (Anglice) a«(/ >^^ will. On the jussive, see 
Tenses, § 62. 

5. nnsjfDn] with the art., the word being an appellative, meaning the 
outlook-point. The Mizpah meant is the lofty height now called Nebi 
Samwil ^2^'^^ feet), 5 miles NW. of Jerusalem. 

6. nin'' ''3S7] LXX add nviX, perhaps rightly: the water was poured 
out not as a libation (for which ^3tp*1 would have been said), but 
probably as a symbolical act implying a complete separation from sin : 
sin was to be cast away as completely as water poured out upon the 
earth, II 14, 4 (Ehrlich). 

8. IJDn C^'inn 7n] pregn. ' do not be deaf (turning) from us,' cf. 
xp. 28, I (GK. § iip^f). pytD so as Jiot to cry (lit. away from crying), 
etc. (§ iipy); cf. Is. 33, 15^ Gen. 27, i. 

9. ins] as V. 12, and 6, 7. 

"'"v Pv3 nhy] 'as a burnt sacrifice, (even) a whole offering, unto 
Yahweh.' For ^J^b cf. Lev. 6, 15 ntppn ^^^3 ^''^b D^iy-pn 'a perpetual 
due, unto Yahweh as a whole offering shall it be burnt,' 16 : Dt. 13, 
^7- 33) ^^' LXX (Tvv TravTt Tw Aaw is merely a paraphrase; cf. Dt. 
13, 17, where 7'h'2 = TravSrjixd (We.). ^''^3 occurs as the name of a 
sacrifice in the Carthaginian Table of Sacrifices and Dues, now at 

1 CIG. 4536 ; Le Bas and Waddington, Voyage ArchSologique, vol. iii. pt. 6 
(Inscriptions de la Syrie), No. 1855 'EHKaQt ixoi, Ba\fj,apKws, Koipavt Ktofjicov ; zb. 1857 
&ea) BaX/^apKwSi ; Clermont-Ganneau, Recueil d^ Archiologie Orientale (Paris, 
1885 ff.), p. 95 [Kfj/x'a; \_'{\i\y'\vaiw BaXnapKoiSt . . . ; p. 103 Aiovvcnos Topyiov, 
SevTfpocTTaTTjs 6(ov BaXfiapKwSov, dvfOrjKe rci Svo. . . . For many other special 
Ba'als, see Paton (as cited in the next note), p. 285 ff. 

^ The notices of the cult of both Baal and 'Ashtart, as attested by inscriptions 
and proper names, are collected and discussed by Baethgen, Beitrdge zur Scmitischen 
Religionsgeschichte (1888), pp. 17-29, 31-37, to be compared with Noldeke's 
review in the ZDMG. 1888, p. 470 ff. See also the articles Ashtoreth (Driver) 
and Baal (Peake) in DB., and by Moore in EB.; and the very full articles, esp. 
the one on Baal, by L. B. Paton in Hastings' Encycl. of Eel. and Ethics, vol. ii. 

VIL 4-16 65 

Marseilles: Cooke, NSI. 42, 3. 5. 7. 9 (so 43, 5), and in the ex- 
pression 7^73 07^ 42, 3. 5. 7. 9, II (see the notes, pp. 117, 118). 

10. TQV^ biX\f2iV \'T'l] The ptcp. marks the action in the cotirse of 
which the Philistines drew near : so e. g. 2 Ki. 6, 5. 26 (the new subject 
in the principal clause following standing _;frj/ for emphasis). 

11. "i3-n^3] Not elsewhere mentioned : Targ. inti* JT^a ; Klo. con- 
jectures nn"ri''n (so Dh.). The Beth-horons were about 6 miles NW. 
of Nebi Samwil ; and the road down to the west from Nebi Samwil 
would pass 'under' them, about \\ mile to the south. 

12. }t^'^] We expect some known locality to be specified, cor- 
responding to ns^fOT, not 'an unnamed crag of rock '(We.). LXX 
T17S TraXatas^ (similarly Pesh. ^mJ) points to such, viz. "IJ^^C', or HJB'^ 
(2 Ch. 13, 19). If, however, this was 'Ai^i Slniyeh (Buhl, 173 ; EB. 
s-v-)> si miles N. of Bethel, it was 10 miles from Mizpah ; and not 
likely to have been named with it in fixing the position of Eben-ezer. 

njn ny] We. Bu. Now. Sm. ''3 N\-| nnj; ; cf. Gen. 24, 30. Jos. 24, 27. 

16. 'V\ ^?^1] Observe the series oi perfects with 1 conv., descriptive 
of Samuel's custom (see on i, 3). 

Ki^l T\Vt^ ""irD] The same idiom — the idea of recurrency expressed 
by r\yvi rm^ {}•> i) being strengthened by the addition of HD — is 
found also Zech. 14, 16. 2 Ch. 24, 5 f (Is. dd, 23 is to be explained 
differently : {J'^n "inD is there made more precise by the addition of 
W\r\1, on the analogy of IJDVn DV im Ex. 5, 13 al.). 

?X~n''3] now Beitin, on a rising hill, 10 miles N. of Jerusalem. 

bj7jn] ' The (sacred stone-) circle.' There were several ' Gilgals ' 
in Palestine, the most famous being the one in the Jordan-valley, a 
little E. of Jericho. The one mentioned here, though in DB. ii. 176^ 
identified with that, is however not likely to have been as distant, and 
is more probably the village now called filjiliyeh, 7 miles N. of 
Bethel. See further EB. s.v. On noin, see p. 3 f. 

n7xn nilDlpDn 73 nx] ns is very difficult. Grammatically, the clause 
is most easily taken as epexeg. of ^Nne>^ nx ' he judged Israel, even all 
these places ' (Keil) : but ' Israel ' denotes naturally such a much 
wider whole than the three places named, that the limitation implied 

1 For tlie translation of a n. pr. by LXX, see Jud. i, 15. 35. 4, 11. 15, 17 al. 
1365 F 

66 The First Book of Samuel, 

in this construction is unnatural. If such were the sense intended by 
the original narrator it would be best to treat 7N"lti'^ nx as a gloss, 
introduced on the ground oi v. 15 by one who conceived Bethel, 
Gilgal, and Mizpah as too narrow a sphere for Samuel's judicial 
activity. The alternative construction is to treat HN as the prep. = 
near^ as in the geographical phrase , , , nx I^N : Jud. 3, 19. 4, 11. 
I Ki. 9, 26. 2 Ki. 9, 27 : the meaning will then be that the place of 
judgement was not in but near or beside the cities mentioned. It is 
doubtful, however, if the passages cited justify this rendering; for they 
are not parallel in form, and nx is not construed in them with a verb. 
AV. /« is not defensible as a rendering of nx : nx only (apparently) 
signifies in or through, when it stands to mark the accusative after 
a verb of motion (Dt. 1,19; 2, 7). Ehrlich would read i?N, comparing 
Dt. 16, 6. I Ki. 8, 29^ 30. 

Judgement was regarded as a sacred act (cf. Ex. 18, 15. 16. 22, 
7-8, with the writer's notes in the Camb. Bible) and administered at 
sacred places (cf. Qadesh, ' holy,' also called 'En-Mishpat, ' Spring 
of judgement,' Gen. 14, 7 ; and Jud. 4, 6 Deborah judging under 
a sacred tree) ; and from LXX kv Tracn rots r\yia(Tikivois rovrots it 
might be inferred that the translators read D'^jJ^npon (i.e. ^''^^''^PSlI , 
misread D''Khippn). Even, however, if this were not the case, Dipn 
itself (like the Arab, maqdni) appears to have sometimes the technical 
sense of a sacred ^X-^ct : cf. Gen. 12, 6, with Skinner's note. 

17. i2^^^] Why the pausal form stands here with a conjunctive 
accent, it seems impossible to explain: cf. Ew. § i-i,^^ note ; GK. 
§ 29' n. 

8. Introduction to second account {10, 17-27^^) 0/ Saul's appointment as 
Jiing. The people ask for a king in consequence of the miscofiduct 
of Samuel's sons, acting as their father s deputies. 

8, 2. 'Jl ^NV "i1D3n] A comparison of i Ch. 6, 13 is instructive, as 
illustrating the manner in which errors have found their way into 
MT., — in this case, by letters having fallen out in the process of 
transcription (n^2N ^J^[n]l [^XV] "I"l3an). 

yntJ^'INaa] in the far south, on the edge of the desert, 50 miles 
SSW. of Jerusalem. 

VII. 16—VIIL 13 67 

3. nns It:"')] Cf. Ex. 23, 2 D'^nn nnx nia:^; i Ki. 2, 28. 

DQtJ'D IDM] ' and turned aside {\.q. perverted) judgement,' Ex. 23, 6. 
Dt. 16, 19. 24, 17 al. 

5*. njpr nnx] ' T'/^ow (emph.) art old.' Notice the separate pronoun. 
5b Cf. for the phraseology Dt. 17, 14 ^33 "J^O 'hv nr^'«K^N mONI 

7**-. ... "IC'X ^3^] ztv"/// regard io all that . . . Cf. 1 2, i. Jos. 1,18. 22,2^. 
7^^ Notice the emphatic position of "jDX and TIX. Cf. Is. 43, 22 
1\>T nN"lp TIN S'h; 57, II (<5/j); and see further on 15, i. 
•]$t3D] The IP as in 7, 8. 

8. IK'y] LXX adds k^oX = v, which seems indeed to be pre- 
supposed by ']b~Ui {' to thee also ') at the end of the verse' (Th. We. 
Bu. etc.). 

9. ""S is] (only here) = ' except l/ial ' . . . : cf. ""J DSS by the 
side of DQN alone (Nu. 13, 28), '•3 DJDN (Job 12, 2), ^3 HJn {if/. 128, 4), 

^an (II 9, I al.), ^D s^n (II 13. 28), >2 ah ds (Dt. 32, 30). 

Dn2 T'yn nyn] T'yn is properly lo bear witness in a court of law, 
then more generally (like testari, /Aaprupo/tai) to testify, aver solemnly, 
protest, — sq. 3, as usually directed against a person, — especially in 
connexion with a solemn charge or threat: Gen. 43, 3 Ii3 n"'yn 'Vir\ 
B'^xn. Ex. 19, 21. 23. I Ki. 2, 42. Jer. 11, 7. \\i. 50, 7. 81, 9. 

10. iriNC] nNlD=7rapa with agen. (2, 23): so with PNtJ*' Jud. I, i4al. 
(cf. Dyt: SnK', ^/^. I, 17), B^-n I Ki. 22, 7 al. {Lex. 86^). 

11. np'' D3^J3 nx] Note how in vv. 1 1-17 the object is in each case 
placed emphatically before the verb. 

'31 1^ D^^'1] 'and will place for himself (i Ki. 20, 34. Jos. 8, 2 ; cf. 
Lex. 515^ h, a) among his chariotry (collectively, as II 15, i), and 
among his horsemen.' For 'y\ xr\\ cf. on 22, 17. 

12. QIC'S] 'and will be for making them,' etc. : an example of the 
so-called * periphrastic future,' which occurs now and then in simple 
prose : see Tenses, § 206, GK. § 114P; and cf. Lev. 10, 10. 11, 

13. ninatDpi nirti^lpj The form nziJO denotes one who possesses an 
established character (as n33 given to butting, N3i? jealous)., or capacity 
(as n3t3 cook [lit. slaughterer'], 332 thief, I*"! judge) : see GK. § 84 h^, and 
for a longer list of examples Kon. ii. 89 f., cf. 179 (4). Ehrlich would 
point nin^bp ninpnp^ remarking that 'the later language has indeed 

F 2 

68 The First Book of Samuel, 

abstract nouns of the form '"i^^i^, but at no time has Hebrew had 
2l /em. from the form b^i^.' 

15. 17. ib'V:] Read probably the Pt'd (denom. : GK. § 52^) ^W, : 
see Neh. 10, 38. And so Dt. 26, 12 (see 14, 22). Neh. 10, 39. 

16. D^ninn] LXX D^IPI (Ehrhch): no doubt, correctly. The 
'young men ' have been dealt with implicitly already in z;. 1 1 f. (D3''J3) : 
in this verse the enumeration begins with slaves, and continues with 
asses. np3 is a collective noun, and may thus be construed with a plur. 
(II 6, 6 MT, I Ki. 5, 3. Job i, 14). The instances of Dnp3 are too 
rare and doubtful (in Neh. 10, 37 unnecessary ; in 2 Ch. 4, 3 D"'ypQ 
must be read with i Ki. 7, 24; and in Am. 6, 12 read D^ "^p^a), for 
Danpa (adopted in ed. i with We.) to be probable. 

'J1 ntJ'yi] 'and use them for his business:' HDX^D as Ez. 15, 5. 
Ex. 38, 24. 

17. DHNl] znd ye yourselves (opp. to the children and possessions 
mentioned before). 

18. '•JD^d] a later usage, in such a case as this, than "JQtD (contrast 
Ex. 3, 7) : see Lex. 818* b. Ehrl. would read '•Jsn, supposing >J2i?0 
to have arisen from the following 7D in D337D through a scribe's error. 

DD7 Dnina] The reflexive dative in common with nn3 : e.g. 13, 2. 
17, 40. Gen. 13, II. Jos. 24, 15. 22. 

19. N-J 1iDN'»l] So Gen. 19, 2 : cf. 1^ ih Hab. i, 6. 2, 6 al. The 
dagesh in these cases is probably designed for the purpose of securing 
a distinct articulation of the consonant (Delitzsch on \^. 94, 12). 
Comp. Spurrell's note on Gen. /. c. ; and add to the references there 
given Baer, Pref. to Liber Proverbiorum (rules of Dagesh), p. xiv ; 
GK. § 20S; and Konig, Lehrgebaude der Hebr. Sprache (1881), i. 
p. 59 (where the subject is treated at length). 

DN '':d] = <5tt/ (10, 19. 12, 12 '•3 alone): so 2, 15. 21, 5 al. See 
Lex. 475a. 

0, I — 10, 16. First (and oldesi) account of Saul's appomtment as 

king. Saul is anoifited king by Samuel for the purpose of defending 

Lsrael against the Philistities {v. 1 6), and bidden ' do as his hand 

may find ' when occasion arises. 

9, I. J''D''"pD] That Kish was of Benjaminite descent is stated in 

the later part of the verse ; and we seem to desiderate here a statement 

VIII. is-IX. 4 69 

of the place to which he belonged (cf. i, i ; Jud. 13, 2). Perhaps, 
therefore, we should read, with We. Bu. Now. etc., pCJn nynJD (see 
13, 15). 'Gibeah of Benjamin' (13, 15. II 23, 29; cf. Jud. 19, 14 
pccn^ ntJ'K nynJn), or 'of Saul' (u, 4. 15, 34), or r\'<ilir\ alone 
(10, 26. 22, 6. 23, 19. 26, i), w'as the modern Tell el-Fiil, — or, as 
there are no ancient remains here, Hawdnit, 500 yards to the NW. 
{ZDPV. 1909, 2-13), — 3 miles N. of Jerusalem (cf. Is. 10, 29). 

>J^?3'« t^'''N p] ' the son of a Benjaminite : ' the name of Aphiah's 
father was either not known or unimportant. There is force, however, 
in Smith's remark, ' "'J^lD'' ty-iN p is not without analogy, at least ^yD"" tJ'''N 
is found II 20, I. Est. 2, 5. But it is unusual to terminate a genealogy 
by saying " son 0/2. Benjaminite." It is probable that p is the error of 
a scribe who expected to continue the genealogy.' 

^riO''] This occurs elsewhere as the patronymic of pD^J^ : v. 4. 22, 7 
^:^rD"' '•pi; II 20, I "'^a"' ^^^ as here. 

^Tl "^123] Here, probably, as 2 Ki. 15, 20 (Bu.), Ru. 2, i, a sturdy 
man o{ substance (not of valour, 2 Ki. 5, i etc.), a sturdy, honest (cf. on 
10, 26), well-to-do country farmer. 

3. tJ'^p^] the dative of relation, going with runnsni : see v. 20 (ip); 
and cf. Is. 26, 14; ch. 13, 22 ('!? N^^r::). But perhaps ^\h Hlinx 
(some) asses of Kish's should be read (Nold. Bu. Ehrl.); cf. 17, 8. 
I Ki. 2, 39 (GK. § i29<"). 

DnyiriD nnx"nx] ins is so closely joined to, and limited by, 
n"'"iy3nD that it lapses into the constr. st. : so frequently, as Gen. 3, 22 
1JDD nns3, Jud. 17, II VJ3D "inN3, etc. (GK. § 130*). Respecting nx 
with a word not strictly defined see Ew. 277^, GK. § 117^; and comp. 
Ex. 21, 28. Nu. 21, 9. II 4, 11; and (with the same word as here) 
Nu. 16, 15 DnDnnt<-ns\ 

4. The repeated change of number in this v. can hardly be original, 
though parallels can be found in MT. : Nu. 13, 22 NT1 ; 33, 7 2:r''1. 
But it can scarcely be questioned that in all these cases the pi. was 
designed throughout by the original writers. See the Introduction, 
§ 4. I c [a). Read therefore, with LXX, liayM (thrice). 

^ In illustration of a man being led to his destiny through the search for lost 
animals, Wellh. {^Reste Arab. Heidentumes, 148, ed. 2, 201) cites Kitab al-Aghani, 
i. 133,4.8, xix. 3ff. 

70 The First Book of Samuel, 

sWh^ pti] presumably the district round rwh^ ^Vn (2 Ki. 4,42), which, 
from the context, cannot have been far from the ' Gilgal' of v. 38. This ' Gilgal,' 
from which (2 Ki. 2, i. 3) Elijah and Elisha 'went down' to Bethel, cannot, as 
the editors of the RV. with marg. references strangely suggest on v,\, be the 
Gilgal of Jos. 5, 9 in the Jordan valley, between Jericho and the Jordan, some 
3000 ft. below Bethel, but is, no doubt, the ' Gilgal ' of i S. 7, 16 (see note), the 
modem Jiljiliyeh, on a high hill (2^41 ft.) 7 miles N. of Bethel. This Gilgal 
is indeed 450 ft. lower than Bethel ; but it is separated from it by the great 
W. ej-Jib (1746 ft., in some parts 2030 ft.), the descent into which may account 
for the ^ wetit down to Bethel' of 2 Ki. 2, 3 {^DB. ii. 177''). BaiOaapKra (LXX 
for n*^"'/K' bv^ in 2 Ki.) is said by Euseb. {Onom. 239, 92) to have been 
15 Roman miles N. of Diospolis (Lydda), a situation which would just suit the 
ruined site SirTsid, i^\ Roman miles or 13 Engl, miles N. of Lydda {EB. s. v.). 
Or Ba'al-shalisha itself might very well be the modern Kefr Thilth, 4 miles NE. 
of Sirlsia (Conder and others) : the Arab, th corresponds correctly to the Heb. K' 
in l^ptf'. Either of these places would be about 25 miles NW. of Gibeah. 

D vVC] not mentioned elsewhere. The name has often beensupposed to be an 
error for D''3?j;tJ* (Josh. 19, 42, — mentioned between Beth-shemesh and Aijalon : 
Jud. I, 35 ; I Ki. 4, 9 1), a place which, though it was no doubt in the neighbour- 
hood, has been identified very precariously, — for the names do not agree phoneti- 
cally,— with Salhit, 4 miles NW. of Aijalon. Aijalon would be about 20 miles S. 
of Kefr Thilth (above), and 12 miles W. of Gibeah. 

Whether, however, all the places mentioned are rightly identified, must remain 
an open question : if the map be consulted, a journey in search of the lost asses 
from Gibeah (Tell el-Ful) to Kefr Thilth (25 miles to the NW.), then 20 miles to 
the S., to some place near Aijalon (??), and thence either 13 miles back to Beit-Rima, 
or 1 1 miles to Rentis, or 12 miles ENE. to Ram- Allah (see p. 4), all within 3 days 
(9, 20), — the land of Zuph (see p. i) being visited, not because Samuel's home 
was in it, but accidentally (9, 5. 6), — does not seem very probable. 

n^J] 'and [there was] nought (sc. of them).' In full, IJ'^X'l : but 
the absolute use of fx in cases such as this is idiomatic, esp. after 
C'p3 (Is. 41, 17 n^i D^n Q^K'paD D^3r2xm D^^jyn; Ez. 7, 25 n^bv i^i'pni 
|\S1 : cf. ch. 10, 14 (pS ^:)), I Ki. 18, 10), and r\f_ (Job 3, 9 pNI -iisi? ip; ; 
Is. 59, II r^l t3D•.^•D^ .Tp3 ; ^. 69, 21). The \ by GK. § 104SJ. 

5. I^N hstJ'l , , . . 1X3 n^n] On this graphic and idiomatic manner 
of expressing a synchronism in place of the more ordinary DN123 NTI 
hxK' "iDS^I f]"!^ pN3, see Tenses, §§ 165-169 ; and cf. 20, 36 ; II 20, 8 ; 
Gen. 44,3. 4; Jud. 15, 14: also below z^. 11 (with the ptcp.). 14, 27; 
17, 23 ; 2 Ki. 2, 23. Ehrlich adds rightly that in this idiom the first 
sentence must only contain a single verb, with at most the addition 
of a negative circumst. clause, denoting time or place (as Gen. 44, 4) : 
the Old Lat. 1XV0 ^<i'1 (cited in Kit.) is thus not original. 

IX. 4-9 71 

fjiy px] the home of Samuel, in Ephraim (see on i, i), which, 
if the places are rightly identified, Saul must have entered again from 
ihe W. end of Benjamin. In lo, 2, when Saul leaves Samuel, he 
re-enters the territory of Benjamin from the North. 

3N^] io be anxious or concerned: xp. 38, 19 I am concerned on 
account of my sin: Jos. 22, 24 nJNID out of concern. The pf. and 
ivaw conv. in continuation of ?in'' JQ, as Gen, 3, 22, Ex. 34, 15 f., 
and regularly: see Tenses, § 115, s.v., GK. § 112P. 

6. n^py 1J37n ICN] 'on which we have started! im is conceived 
here as including the goal : for of course they would not need to 
be told the way they had already come. Gen. 24, 42 differently: 
' which I am going (^.?i^) upon ; ' so Jud. 18, 5. 

7. njni] 'And lo, we shall go, and what shall we bring?' etc. 
= And if wt go, what . . .} So f^, Ex. 8, 22 : cf. on 20, 12, and 
II 18, II. 

pin] only here in prose, and only altogether five times in Hebrew, 
mostly in the sense of goi?ig away, departing. The word is common 
in Aramaic, being in the Targums the usual representative of "]^n 
(which is not used with the same constancy in Aram, as in Heb.) : 
e.g. in the Targ. of this chapter, vv. 3^. 6. 10. 

N''nnp"PJ^ nilt^ni] pt?, as pointed, must, as Ehrlich remarks, belong 
to the inf. [Lex. 34^ 5), and the meaning must be, ' and a present it 
is impossible to bring.' The sense required is 'and there is no present 
to bring,' for which we must read either t^^nnb Trwr\ fXI (Ex. 17, i), 
or N^^n^ pX miDTll (Gen. 2, 5. Nu. 20, 5 r\'\r\^h nx D^OI. 2 Ki. 19, 3 : 
Lex. 34^ top). The latter is the natural correction to make here. 

mitJTl] only here : comp. the use of the cognate verb '^^B' Is. 57, 9. 
The passage may be illustrated from 2 Ki. 4, 42 (the gifts offered to 

8. NVI23] there is foioid, idiom, for there is here (21, 4), or there is 
present {i^, 16); cf. Lex. 594*. 

^nnJl] Read nrno"i with LXX, Th. We. Kp. etc. : the pf. with 
waw conv. with the force of a precative or mild imperative, as Jud. 
II, 8: ch. 20, 25; 25, 27 al. {Tenses, § 119 8). 

9. An explanatory gloss, the proper place of which is evidently after 
V. II, where ilNin first occurs in the narrative. 

72 The First Book of Samuel, 

Nnp""] used to be called: GK. § 1076. 

C'ljeb] So Ruth 4, 7 (probably a similar gloss); Jud. i, 23. 

11. 1SX0 ncni . . . C^y n»n] Where, in this idiom (see v. 5), the 
subject of the two verbs is the savie, the pron. is repeated : as Gen. 
38, 25; Jud. 18, 3. Hence 2 Ki. 10, 13 for Ninn read Nini (connecting 
12^ with i3a«. N^JO"*"), suggested in Kittel, would not here be a Heb. 

12. B'.l] So, alone, in answer to a question, 2 Ki. 10, 15. Jer. 37, 
17 t. Cf. Lex. 441^ a. 

DVn ''3 nny iriD T'JQ? run] LXX IZov Kara ttpoo-wttov vfiwv' vvv 8ia 
TT/i/ Tjixepav kt\., whence We., developing a suggestion of Lagarde\ 
restores D^'lIS i^^V D3''?.Sp '^r!'!' ' lo, he is before you : now, just at 
present, he is come to the city,' etc. In support of this restoration, 
We. remarks (i) that the swg. y^sh agrees ill with v. 12, in which the 
pi. is used throughout : (2) against MT. nn», that no reason appears 
why Saul should hasteti, if Samuel had just come into the city — not, 
as has been supposed, from some journey, but — from the neighbour- 
ing TKil (where he had recently been, v. 23, and given instructions — 
T'i^N ''n"i?:N n^J'K— to the cook). The superfluous in in MT. We. 
plausibly explains as a remnant of the ' explicit ' subject nN"in, which 
had been inserted by a scribe as a subj. for DS^JS^ (though, when the 
noun to which njn refers has immediately preceded, the pron., whether 
Nin 1MT\ or (rare) iSH, is not unfrequently omitted; cf. 15, 12. 16, 11. 
30, 3. 16: Tenses, § 135. 6, 2). DVra will have the same force as in 
V, 13^, where it is likewise rendered Sta riyv rj/jiepav by LXX. The 
expression recurs Neh. 5, 11, and means 0/ once, just now, the force of 
DV, as in DV3 2, 16, being forgotten. 

13. p] p often answers to 3 in comparisons {Lex. 486^); but to 
express correspondence in time, it is very rare. Cf. Hos. 6, 3, as 
emended very plausibly by Giesebrecht, ^HNJfOa |3 ^JinK'S. 

Kin ''3] ' for he . . ' Notice the emphatic pronoun. 
nnN n^55:^^n DVna inx->D] 'for himiwsX now— you will find him,' the 
first IDN not being subordinated directly to the verb, but being resumed 

* Anmerknngen zur Griech. Ueberseizang der Proverbien (1863), p. iii (D3''3D^ 

nxin for -in» y:^ih). 

IX. g-ij 73 

in ins at the end, which thus becomes the direct accusative. The case 
is but an extension of the principle which is exemplified in Gen. 13, 15 
njnnx ^^ . . , pNin ^3 riN •'3 for all the land . . . . , to thee will I give 
it; 21, 13; ch. 25, 29 and often {Tenses, 197. 6). The resumption 
only happens to be rare when the first object is a pronoun : but see 
2 Ki. 9, 27 in^n iriN Oa Him also, smite him ! 'To omit [as Th. 
would do] one of the two inx borders on barbarism ' (We.). Klo. 
Bu., however, regard the first IDN as an error for nny (cf. v. 1 2). 

14. Tiyn PV^l] The city itself then was on an elevation: and the 
nm on a still higher elevation outside it (^ nonn m^V^ : conversely, it 
is said, z;. 25 Tyn n'o:iri'a nT")). 

y''!ir\ linn] Probably this is an ancient error for '\)}^r\ 'jinn ' in the 
middle of the gale:' this agrees better both with z;. 18 and with the 
language of this verse (Saul and his servant were coming in, and 
Sam.uel was going out to meet them). 

15. nba ^"''l] An example of the manner in which the pluperfect 
tense is expressed in Hebrew. By the avoidance of the common 
descriptive tense "•'''' ^ri (i.e. lit. 'and Y. we7it on to uncover') the 
connexion with w^hat precedes is severed, and the mind is left free to 
throw back the time of npj to a period prior to the point which the 
narrative itself has reached. So regularly, as 14, 27. 25, 21. 28, 3; 
n 18, 18 etc. {Tenses, § 76 Obs.; GK. §§ io6f, 142b). For 's pN HN n^J, 
cf. 20, 2. 12. 13. 22, 8. 17. II 7, 27. 

16. ino nyri] 'at the time to-morrow ' = when to-morrow has 
come. So II 20, 12. Ex. 9, 18. i Ki. 19, 2. 20, 6. 2 Ki. 7, i. 18. 
10, 6t. Cf. Gen. 18, 10. 14. 2 Ki. 4, 16. i7t i^'O nys i.e. (probably) 
'at the time, (as it is) reviving ' = in the returning year, "ino must not 
in these phrases be regarded as a genitive, since ny3 has the art. In 
full, they would be "inn nyn nvna, n^n nyn ni^na (Hiizig on Job 39, 17). 

T'Jj] ' prince,' lit. one in fro7it, leader : used often in the more 
elevated prose (especially in the prophetic utterances in Sam. and 
Kings) for the chief ruler of Israel (10, i. 13,14. 25,30. II 5, 2. 6,21. 
7, 8. I Ki. I, 35. 14, 7. 16, 2. 20, 5 ; cf. Is. 55, 4). 

i6b. '•oy-nx] LXX ^oy ^:y-nN (Ex. 3, 7): no doubt, rightly. 

'J1 nsn ^3] Gen. 18, 21. 

17. inay] njy as Jud. 18, 14. Is. 14, 10 al., to answer, not some- 

74 The First Book of Samuel, 

thing which has been said, but as the situation may require or suggest 
{Lex. 773a). 

'\hi< ^mox "iC'n] ' as io whom I said unto thee, This one,' etc. ; 
of. V. 23^. 

"ixy] here only in the sense of coercere mpen'o : cf. "lii'V Jud. 18, 7 
(in a passage, however, where the text is very suspicious). 

18. 7f<"it:B' nx] ' drew near lo ' is evidently the sense that is intended, 
which riN wi'lh will scarcely express. No doubt both here, ch. 30, 21, 
and Nu. 4, 19 (as Jud. 19, 18^ after *]7n), ns is merely an error for 7K. 

19. Dn^3S'l] LXX Ka\ </)aye, i.e. |?S'?f?l (or ^|?^?^1). 

20. n"'D\n nc^tr DVn] 'to-day, three days' (read with We. Bu., 
GK. § 134'^, C^D"), i.e. for three days, (Anglice) three days ago. 
Cf. 30, 13 \wb'^ DVn, where h'^ty is omitted. 

Dn^ . , . , ni^nxh] nrh resumes niiriN^ upon exactly the same 
principle as that explained in the case of the accus. on v. 13: cf. 
Gen. 2, 17 (p). II 6, 23 (7). 2 Ki. 22, 18 (^t<) : Tenses, § 197 Obs. i. 

':i Db'ri-^X] The tone is drawn back by "^N {Te7ises, § 70), as it is 
(GK. § 72*) by the waiv consec. ; cf. II 17, 16 |^^"??<. Ex. 23, i. 
The idiom, set the heart (mind) to (on), as II 13, 20 al. Cf. Lex. 
523'^ (3 e), 524^5 (3 e) ; and on 4, 20. 

'V\ "'JDPl] Rightly rendered by LXX, Vulg. kox tlvi to. wpata tov 
'larparjX; et cuius erunt optima quaeque Israel? RV. and for whom 
is all that is desirable in Lsrael ? rn?Dn is used in the same concrete 
sense as in Hag. 2, 7 Cljn ^3 mr:n isni (where note the plural verb) 
'and the desirable things (i.e. costly offerings: see Is. 60, 5 end^ of 
all nations shall come,' etc. But perhaps both there and here it 
is better to point Hipn (ptcp. pass.). 

2 1 . ^3JN] ?;/// W (GK. p. 60 «.), on account of the pause (see on i , 1 5). 
p?0^:n ^DQB' ^.Pi'pr?] ^JUpO should be logically f;?i"p»?, or rather 

(Ehrlich) ibjpl? ^ The plural may be due to the illogical attraction 
of ''D2C (read as "^P^B*). 

* So in the one passage in which the 5/. c. of |Dp occurs, 2 Ch. 21, 17. Ehrlich 
maintains that fbp and |t3p cannot be used promiscuously, but that \Ci\> is the 
form out of pause, fCp the form in pause (cf. GK. § 29"). It is true, fbi? is 
always found with athnah and soph-pasttq, and |t3p is always found with a conj. 
accent : but with the smaller disj. accents the pointing varies : thus we have [Di? 

IX. iy-24 75 

pD^Jl ^cnB*] 'Unquestionably an error for 'n D^B'' (Keil). How- 
ever, curiously enough, the same expression occurs Jud. 20, 12 ^33 
pD'iJa ^paK'. We. Stade (p. 204) propose in both cases to point 
"•P?^, thinking that 'perhaps the archaic form of the si. c. (GK, § 90I) 
should be here restored ; ' but this is hardly probable. With the 
passage generally, cf. Jud. 6, 15, where Gideon expresses, or affects, 
similar modesty. 

ni-iyvn] = the smallest: GK. § 1338^. 

22. ^nDl^'^] See on i, 18. We should expect r\r\yJ^r\. 

K'N"13] at the head or top: i Ki. 21, 9. 12. CN^p = those invited 
to a feast, as i Ki. i, 41. 49 ; cf. Nip ib. 9. 10. 

23. nJO] See on I, 4. 

24. nvyni] There are three cases in which n has apparently the 
force of the relative^; (i) with a verb, {a) where the construction 
depends upon the consonants. This is well substantiated for late 
Hebrew (Ch. Ezr.), i Ch. 26, 28. 29, 8 al. : but the one example in 
middle Hebrew, Jos. 10, 24^, is so isolated that it rests probably upon 
a textual corruption (D^37nn might easily be restored): (3) where 
the construction depends solely upon the punctuation, chiefly in the 
3rd sing. fern. perf. Qal (as riN'^n Gen. 18, 21; 46, 27 nJ^CTi Is. 51, 
10^'), or in the 3rd sing, masc perf. Nif. (as in Ip'npi^n Gen. 21, 3 ; 
nsi^n I Ki. II, 9). Whether this punctuation represents a genuine 
tradition is extremely questionable : had n been in use in earlier 
Hebrew with the force of a relative, it is strange that it should appear 
once only with 3 pi. : its restriction to cases in which a different 
accent ('"^^^n) or punctuation (t^l^n^ nx"l3n) ^vould give rise to the 
regular construction ^ and the fact that the Massorah itself does not 

16, II al., but ftii^ 20, 2 al. ; |t:p II 9, I2t, but fbp ch. 5,9. 20, 35. 22, 15 al. ; 
and |Di5 Est. i, sf, but |bp ch. 25, 36!. If the normal form were "^O^), it is 
strange that we should find always the fern, iia^p, the //. D''3Dp, and before a sf. 
the form DS^p. 

1 Comp. Ew. § 331*' (i) and note: GK. § 138',^ 

* For Jer. 5, 13 (Hitzig, Graf, Keil) is very uncertain; either ")2''J is a subst. 
(Ew. § 156*; GK. § 52°), or, more probably, 13'^n should be read. 

^ See, e.g. Is. 51, 9 nni'non; Gen. 48, 5 1^ D''ni'1Jn. And so in Ez. 26, 17 
n^pnn, read as npSin, may be the ptcp. /"^^'a/ without D, like 73N Ex. 3, 2 etc. 
(Ew. § 169^; GK. §52'). 

76 The First Book of Samuel, 

point consistently (see e.g. nii,2n Gen. 46, 26 al.; nxijn Gen. 12, 7. 
35, i), make it highly probable that the anomaly in these cases is not 
original, and that in fact n as a relative is unknown to classical 
Hebrew. (2) Before a preposition — as in the Gk. idiom to ctt' avriys 
— it occurs here alone in the OT., though combinations of the type 
nvy "IK'X are of constant occurrence. The usage here is thus doubly 
exceptional, and entirely unsupported by precedent or parallel. Under 
the circumstances it can scarcely be doubted that Geiger l^Urschri/t, 
p. 380) is right in reading n^p^^H] and the /a/ tail (Ex, 29, 22 and 
elsewhere in the ritual laws of P). The nvN is the fat tail of certain 
breeds of sheep ^ (commonly known as ' Cape sheep '), and is still 
esteemed a delicacy in the East : when dressed and served at table 
it much resembles marrow (the writer has seen and tasted it in Syria). 
The allusion in the v. will thus be to certain choice pieces reserved 
specially (v. 23^) for those honoured with a place D'^NIipn {J*N"^3^ 

"IJ^N"*!] The subj. is Samuel, not the cook. 

'J1 "Wyoh ''3] ' because unto the appointed time [hath it been] kept 
for thee, saying, I have invited the people.' "IDX^ is construed with 
"ilDB' freely, Kara crweo-tv: cf. Ex. 5, 14 (where the subject of the 
preceding verb is not that implied in 1»N^). The sense thus obtained, 
however, is not good ; and Nin is desiderated after IIDB' (though see 
GK. § 1 1 68; nrOB', or (GK. § 144^) "ipC', for niDt^ would also be an 
easy emendation). It can thus hardly be doubted that there is some 
corruption in the text (especially in ^nx"lp Dyn "IDN^). 1XtJ>J also does 
not mean ' reserved ' (Ew.), but left over. F. 1 3 however suggests that 
Samuel and Saul did not take their meal after the others had finished, 
but that the other guests waited to begin their meal until Samuel had 
arrived : what we expect, therefore, here is a ' polite invitation to 
Saul, as the guest of honour, to begin the meal ; ' the others would 
then begin theirs. Sm. Now. suggest, for "iNtJ^JH^ "'??f'L' the flesh (of 

' Comp. the notice in Hdt. 3. 13; and see in the Jewish Encycl. xi. 250 an 
illustration of such a sheep, with a small cart supporting the long and heavy 
' fat tail.' 

' The shoulder and the ' fat tail ' are still the pieces offered by the fellah in 
of Palestine to the guest whom they desire to honour {ZDFV. vi. 98, cited by 
Nestle, Marginalien, 1893, p. 13 f.). 

IX. 24— X. I 77 

flesh prepared for the table, Ex. 21, 10. \\/. 78, 20), and Sm, Bu. 
Now., for "1"I0-', IJins {^i^Yns Gen. 32, 5, or =i3-inN Gen. 34, 19), or 
nns; Sm. Now. also follow Bu. in reading Q''i<";)i?Li ^V ''^kS for -ir:N^ 
"TlKIp Dyn : we then get, ' Behold, the flesh is set before thee ! Eat ! 
for we (or they) have tarried for thee unto the appointed time, that thou 
viayest eat with them that are invited! But 'the flesh is set before thee' 
is rather a bald and graceless invitation ; and iriN always (even in 
Gen. 32, 5, where it is opposed to TnJ) has the idea of tarrying later 
than is usual, or might be expected ; though suitable, therefore, with 
IVIOrrp (II 20, 5), would it be suitable with 'to the appointed time?' 
Nothing preferable to D''Nipn Dy 73N7 has been suggested : but in the 
earlier part of the verse, it would be a smaller, and perhaps a sufficient, 
change to read, for ~l^<K'3^, ncK'Jn 'that which has been /^f/i/ (reserved) ' 
(see V. 23^), and for "ilOK^, as suggested above, ^"^9.?' °^ ""^^^ ^• 

25-26. irD3B''''l :Jjn ^y hxt^'Dy I^T'I] LXX /cat Sieo-Tpwo-av Tw SaouX 
cVi Tw 8w/AaTi, Kixi iKOifx-qB-q = :32"fn 3?l1 ^V ^^N^b (Pr. 7, 16) IISl'l. 
The sequence in MT. is so bad ("inTI and 1?D"'3*kJ'M both being pre- 
mature, when 'ai Xlp''1 follows) that there can be little doubt that this 
is the true reading: 'And they spread a couch for Saul on the house- 
top, and he lay down,' to which Samuel's calling to Saul on the 
house-top in the morning {v. 26 'ji ^^''1) forms now a natural and 
suitable sequel. 

27. DVa] = first 0/ all (before going on) : cf. on 2, 16. 

10, I. fDl>'n"i2-ns] Cf. 2 Ki. 9, 1.3. 

••a Nibn] 'Is it not that.?' = 'Hath not?' is shewn by II 13, 28 

* Ew. on the basis of LXX vapa roiis dWov; suggested for Dyn "ION? "INE^D 
Dyn = * above the rest of the people (whom) I have invited,' which We. is disposed 
to acquiesce in, though it is true that IX'i' is not a word found elsewhere in the 
best Hebrew prose style (Ch. Ezr. Neh. Est., and of course in Isaiah); and the 
omission of y^'^ before Dyn is questionable (on 14, 21). LXX for TlNIp have 
a-noKVL^e nip off {= p^O Lev. i, 15 : 2i*p 2 Ki. 6, 6: f]t}p Ez. 17, 4. 21), whence 
Th. suggests t<3~)-*"Jp ctit off! {Anglice Help yourself!), cf. Job 33, 6 *JJl>np "ICHD 
*3X D2 . But it is not probable that a word so rare in Heb. as ^"Ip (and usually 
occurring in a different application — py IS^p"") would have been used in this sense. 
It must however be admitted that in post-Bibl. Hebrew |*^p is used oi cutting tip 
food into pieces : see Levy, NHVVB. s. v. LXX ei'y fiaprvpiov of course presupposes 
nothing different from ly^D, which the translators elsewhere connected wrongly 
with liy : cf. (TKrivfj tov fxapTvpiov for lyiTO PHX. 

7^ The First Book of Samuel, 

to be a good Hebrew expression: but the long addition preserved 
in LXX and Vulg. has every appearance of being original. The 
insertion would read in Hebrew thus : i^yby "^^yh ^"^ ^H^jp] Nl^^n 

^-2 [nixn ^^-np^ rn^iN n>?? Mf^\T\ nrixi ^"^ tm n"^vn nrixi' bx-jb^^y 
: TIY? inpm 7y '>"'' ■^^t^'0. The circumstantiality of the account is here 
not out of place : the express mention of the signs at an earlier stage 
of the instructions to Saul than v. 7, is what might be expected : and 
the omission of the clause in MT. may be readily explained by the 
supposition that a transcriber's eye passed from the first nin> int:^n to 
the second. So Dr. Weir. 

2. Dy] = close to, 7tear: Gen. 25, 11. 35, 4. II 19, 38 al. As Jer. 
31, 15 shews, Rachel's grave must have been very near Ramah, i.e. the 
Ramah of Is. 10, 29, now er-Rdm. Er-Ram is 5 miles S. of Bethel, 
which, according to Jos. 18, 13 (P), was on the N. border of Benjamin : 
but at this time, it seems, Ephraim extended further to the S. (see esp. 
Jud. 4, 5). In Gen. 35, 20. 48, 7 Dn^ n^3 Nin, identifying Ephrath 
with Bethleheni, is either a gloss (so Dillmann and most commentators), 
or (Delitzsch on Gen. 35, 20) embodies a different tradition. 

pD^33 ^13J] the Northern border : cf. on 9, 5. 

nV7Vn] The word arouses suspicion. The locality intended seems 
to be so accurately defined by hrr\ ninp Dy, that we are surprised at 
a closer definition following, especially in such an obscure form ; for, 
as nS7V possesses no meaning, it cannot designate any particular spot 
near Rachel's grave, at which the men were to be met. LXX have 
aXko^xivovi /AcyaXa. 'AAAo/teVovs = Ol^pif (see V. 6) : but though n^V 
^y may be rendered (metaph.) leap upon, xh^ absolutely cannot express 
the idea of leaping. ^eyaAa does not occur elsewhere in LXX in an 
adverbial sense (We.); so probably here it is nothing but a Hebrew 
word written in Greek letters, and transformed into something signifi- 
cant in Greeks Many MSS. after Bevia/xcii/ insert kv ^rjXuy (= n^^i'3) 
iv BaKaXaO ; Lucian's recension after Baaafxiv and before dXX. fxey. 

1 Cf. I Ki. 18, 32 BaXacraav from Hpyn ; Am. 3, 12 Upils from t^iy (as Jerome, 
cited by Field, points out) ; Jer. 8, 7 aypov ; 34, 5 %ms a'Sov Kkavaovrai. For other 
examples, see the Introduction, § 4. i&b; Thackeray, Granun.of OT. Greeki^i^o^), 
P- 37 f- 

X. 2-4 79 

adds fx^(rrjiJi.PpLa<; [as though n^* ^V3 = in umbra sereni : hence Vulg^. 
men'die]. All these are evidently different attempts to render or 
represent the five consonants which stand now as nivV3 : but they 
throw no light either upon the word itself or upon the original reading 
which may underlie it. 

niinxn ■'laT ns] = the viatters = the concern of the asses : cf. py 
D3nm Dt. 4, 2 1. Comp. Delitzsch or Cheyne on i/^. 65, 4. But 1?"^ 
(LXX prjixa) would be more natural. 

JNll] The pf. and \ consec, with a frequentative force {Tenses, 
§ 113. 4 a; GK. § 112m), after a bare perfect (GK. § 112^). JwXni 
(Bu. al.), following ^^}, is no improvement: we should need Nin J^^^^ 
(Jer. 48, 11); the cases noted in GK. § 1168 are different. 

3. fi^n] To pass on. Elsewhere only in poetry, as a poet. syn. of 
*l?y, to come (or pass) on, usually with some swiftness or force : of a 
flood, Is. 8, 8; a tempest 21, i; a breath. Job 4, 15; of the Chaldaean 
conqueror compared to a wind, Hab. I, II ; of God, Job 9, 1 1. 11,10; 
of days passing quickly away like skiffs down a stream, Job 9, 26. The 
word is hardly one that would be expected here : and Ehrlich would 
read for it '^?b\^^,. 

uhv] Bethel (2890ft.) was itself on a hill; and the plateau on 
which the hill stands is considerably higher than most of the surround- 
ing country. ' To God,' Bethel being an ancient sacred place. 

Dn^ nnna ne^^C^] is? \s /em. (Ex. 29, 23 al.); and though a fem. 
numeral is found here and there with a fem. noun (as Gen. 7, 13. 
Job I, 4: GK. § 97c; Konig, iii. 322), it is probably best to restore 
with We. ^b^. Klo. Bu., remarking that two out of three loaves 
would be a large proportion to give as a present, would read (after 
LXX dyyeZa) "''^'^3 baskets (Am. 8, i) ; Sm. would read \^| (9, 7). 

4. D1?I^? "p I^XC'l] and shall ask thee with regard to welfare, — 
a common Heb. expression (17, 22. 25, 5. Gen. 43, 27 al.). Why 
the direct object is introduced by h, is not apparent : perhaps (cf. 
Konig, iii. § 327k) from assimilation to CvC^"?. 

Cn? TiU^ the fem. TiC' may be on account of ni"i33 understood ^ ; 

^ Which Klo. Bn. Dh. would even insert here, after LXX ^vh airapxas dpTuu, 
i.e., it is supposed, ni"l33, misread ni"lb3 ; but mi33 is nowhere else misrendered 

8o The First Book of Samuel, 

or, as on? is elsewhere construed as a masc. (onf' mtry i Ki. 14, 3. 
Dn^ nt'Dn ch. 21, 4 ; cf. n-'trJN ••JK', D''tJ'JN niK'y : GK. § 97b), '•JK' should 
perhaps be restored. 

5. D'-n^NH nv^j] identical, as the DTiK'bs n^V3 shews, with the y2) 
(rd. ny33) of 13, 3; and most probably the older name, marking it 
as an ancient holy place, of ' Gibeah of Saul.' Ram- Allah, 7 miles N. 
of Tell el-Ful (suggested in H. G. p. 250), is much too far to the north. 
On p inN, see GK. § 29^. 

••avj] LXX, Pesh. Vulg. express a singular ; and, as the sing, occurs 
also 13, 3. 4, 3''^f3 should in all probability be read accordingly here. 
The accidental transposition of two contiguous letters is not unfre- 
quent in MT. : in the Ochlah we-Ochlah, § 91, there is a list of 
sixty-two such transpositions which have been corrected by the 
Massorah, Some few of the corrections may be questioned : but 
the majority are certainly authorized (e.g. ''JK'D''ni Jud. 16, 26; vmi^ 
Jer. 17, 23; |1nN^^ Ez. 40, 15; n1D!'^"^ Pr. 31, 27 cannot be original 
readings). As to the meaning, y^: has the sense oi pillar in Gen. 
19, 26, o^ prefect or deputy in 11 8, 6. 14. i Ki. 4, 19; possibly also 
it might be used to denote a post or garrison, like 3X0 13, 23. 
Which of these senses it has here, it is difficult to say ; versions and 
commentators are equally divided, {a) LXX here (one rendering') 
has dvctore/xa, i.e. prob. a pillar erected as a symbol or trophy of 
Philistine domination: so (prob,) Pesh., and amongst moderns Th. 
Bo. We. if) Vulg. has stah'o, i.e. a military post, or garrison: so 
EVV. Ge. Ke. (c) Targ. has i^DlDDK (i.e. o-Tpar-qyol) both here and 
13, 3. 4 (likewise in the plur.): similarly Ew. Gr. Sm. Bu. Now., only 
reading as a sing. 2''!i} {prefect, officer). On the whole (the sense 
stati'o being not otherwise substantiated), {c) is probably to be 

It appears from this verse that a large area of Central Palestine 
was now in the hands of the Philistines. 

'J1 \"l''l] The jussive is unexpected. In II 5, 24 (= i Ch. 14, 15), 
Ruth 3, 4 it can be explained as expressing a command : but that 
is not the case here; and it is better to suppose it to be an error 

1 In the other rend, the word is simply transliterated Nao-et/3, as in 13, 3. 4. 

X. s-8 8i 

for ~J"i1 (Sm.). In r Ki. 14, 5b read ^n^l. The explanation in GK. 
§ ii2*i is artificial, and not probable. 

QixaJntD nt:ni] a circumstantial clause, describing the condition 
in which the prophets would be as they came down from the nc3 : 
cf. Jer. 38, 22 n'"i?DN njni = they saying {Tenses, § 160 ; GK. § 141®). 

The word, which is in the reflexive conj. and a denominative, denotes 
to play or act the prophet, viz. by manifestations of physical excitement 
— not unlike those exhibited by the dervishes of the present day in 
the East* — such as are more evidently described, on the second 
occasion when Saul is seized by the contagious frenzy, 19, 20 IT. 
So I Ki. 22, 10 Ahaz and Jehoshaphat were sitting in the gate of 
Samaria Dn"'JD^ D\X3:nD n''N''3jn ^31 : comp. (of the prophets of Baal) 
tb. 18, 29. From this peculiarity, the prophet is sometimes described 
mockingly as VJ^'p 2 Ki. 9, 11. Hos. 9, 7 ; cf. Jer. 29, 26. 

6. nn?l»l] the same word z'. 10; Jud. 14, 6. 19. 15, 14 (of Samson); ch. 
II, 6; 16, 13 (David); also 18, 10, where the subject is QTi^N nil, but 
the direction in which the inspired activity displays itself is diflerent. 

n''3Jnni] for nX3:nni; cf. v. 13. See GK. § vsnq. 

7. T\t'''!i « . . ilTn] n^^1 would be resumed normally by rC^V"^, or 
nc^'yn (the latter less usual in ordinary prose). The uncommon imper. 
was chosen, no doubt, as more forcible: cf. Dt. 6, io-i2a'. 

n:"'K3n] So Jer. 9, 16. Est. 4, 4. i/r. 45, i6t. The more usual form 
is n:wX3n (II times), or (Gen. 30, 38) Ti^^ri ; GK. § 76^. 

IT" X^on IB'N] The same idiom in ch. 25, 8. Jud. 9, 33^ Qoh. 9, 10. 

8. Introduction to first account 0/ Saul' s rejection (13, 7^-1 5a). 

' And thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal ; and, behold, I am 
coming down to thee to sacrifice . . . : seven days shalt thou wait, 
until I come to thee, and declare to thee what thou shalt do.' . . , njni 
is a circumstantial clause (cf. Jud. 9, 33) and subordinate to T\T\\ Hin 
throwing the idea which it introduces into relief, and giving it greater 
prominence than it would otherwise have : then b is supplementary 
to a, defining more closely what Saul is to do at Gilgal until Samuel 
meets him there ^ 

^ Comp. Lane, Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (ed. 5, 1871), 
ii. 151-1 54, 174 f., 179 f.; W. R. Smith, Prophets of Israel, pp. 86, 390 f. (^391 f.). 
* Keil's construction of this verse is illegitimate. The verse refers evidently to 
i3fi.<; G 

82 The First Book of Samuel, 

riTT"!] The Gilgal here meant is the one in the Jordan-valley 
{Jtljul or JiljuUyeh), near Jericho, 600 ft. below the Medit. Sea, and 
consequently some 3350ft. below Gibeah; hence 'go down.' 

9. HMl] See on i, 12. Due probably to a scribe, who judged in 
error, from the tense of the preceding verses, that another future was 
still to follow : >nM is the tense which ought to be used, and which 
ought, no doubt, to be restored. 

IDDtJ' WJDnDj Cf. 51-iy r\i^r\ (in flight), Jer. 48, 39. 
^a^] For the constr., cf. Zeph. 3, 9. 

10. Dty] redundant before nnynjn. Read with LXX {iKeWev) CJK'P, 
i. e. either the place where Saul parted from Samuel, or the place 
mentioned in v. 3 f., the account of how the first two signs [vv. 1-4) 
came to pass, having fallen out of the narrative after v. 9. The 
' Gibeah ' will be the ' Gibeah of God ' of v. 5. 

iriNip^ , . , mm] So (without a verb) II 15, 32; 1 Ki. 18, 7 ; 
Pr. 7, 10. 

1 1. iN"i''i . . . lynv b^ ■'mi] Exactly so, II 2, 23^ noyi . . . N3n ^3 Wi ; 

and analogously, with mm, o'i future time, Nu. 21, 8 al., and of 
reiteration in the past, Jud. 19, 30. lyiv ?3 is a ptcp. absol. 'and it 
came to pass, as regards all that knew him, that,' etc.: cf. GK. § 1 16^; 
Tenses, § 121, Obs. i. For hcriSIO, see GK. § 20^ 

13, 8-14, whereas, in the Book of Samuel as we have it, Samuel and Saul appear 
together at Gilgal earlier, viz. on the occasion 11, 14 f. Keil therefore, seeking 
to exclude a reference to this occasion, and to interpret the verse as referring only 
to the subsequent one, presses the circumstantial clause introduced by lUm , saying 
that this presupposes that the preceding words ' And thou shalt go down before me ' 
express merely a condition, in view of which, when it is satisfied, Samuel instructs 
Saul how to act. He construes, therefore : ' And if thou goest down before me to 
Gilgal, and lo, I come down to thee, etc., then thou shalt wait seven days until 
I come to thee,' etc. ilJm, however, cannot influence the sense of what precedes ; 
and (what is more important) rn"1^1 followed by bnin cannot express a condition. 
Had mi^l expressed a (virtual) condition, it must have been followed by npnim 
(so regularly, as 19, 3 ; Num. 14, 15 etc. : Tenses, § 149) : pmn D"'JD'' ny^t!' being 
attached aawhkrws, shews that the preceding clause is complete in itself, i.e. that 
mmi expresses a positive command, and not a condition. The clause ''21 mi^l 
expresses what is to be done by Saul not necessarily immediately after 7'', but 
as soon after it as is convenient. The collision with 11, 14 f. arises from the fact 
that this part of the Books of Samuel is composed of sources originally distinct : 
10, 8 and 13, 7'*-i5* are thus related to one another, but stand out of connexion 
with II, 14 f. 

X. 8-ig 83 

N33] Prob. the ptcp., was prophcsywg, with Xin omitted after T\'ir^ 
{Tenses, § 135. 6, 2 ; GK. § 11 68). 

nTl nrnrD] What, now, has happened to ... ? HT strengthens and 
gives point to no; so Gen. 27, 20. Jud. 18, 24 al.; similarly in ni ^D, 
nT"nD7. Comp. in Arabic o^i^ Ij U : and see especially Fleischer, 
Kleinere Schriften, i. 355 f. (who adduces from Arabic usage reasons 
in support of this explanation of the idiom); Lane, Arab. Lex., s. v. 
li, p. 948. Briefer explanations will be found in GK. § 136^; Ew. 
§§ 183a, 325a. 

12. Dn''2^< "'OI] 'But who is their father?' i.e. is their father more 
likely than Qish to have had a son a prophet .'' Prophetic inspiration 
is no hereditary possession ; and it is not more remarkable in the case 
of Saul, than in the case of any other member of the troop of prophets. 
Against the easier, but weak, reading of LXX, Pesh. irT'SN, see We. 

nriM] for the fem. (= it), cf. II 3, 37. Jos. 11, 20. i Ki. 2, 15: 
GK. § 144^ 

1 3. HDin] With nt:nn we should have expected by^ for xn^l ; the 
conversation, vv. 14-16, is also more likely to have taken place in 
a private house than on the Bamah. Hence We. and most read : 
nn^an for n»3n. Ehrl. objects that in"'3 bx or {v. 26. 23, 18) in'3^, 
not nn''2n, is said of a person going to his own house. However, in 
Gen. 43, 26 we have njT'an flDV NTl; and nn''2n here would be not so 
much his house, as the house, as opposed to the street (cf. Jud. 
19, 15. Jos. 2, 18), where Saul had been playing the prophet. Bu. 
Dh., after LXX ets t6v ftowov, read (see vv. 5. 10) nyajn : but that 
seems to have been reached in v. 10. 

14. px ''3] See on 9, 4, 

16. ^XIDB' "IDN i^J'N] a misplaced gloss, not expressed by LXX. 
EVV. conceal the awkward and unnatural position of the words : cf. 
their rendering of Ex. 14, 9. 

10, 17-27*. Saui chosen by lot as king {sequel to 8). 

17. ns^JJDn] Nebi Samwil : see on 7, 16. 

18. ''33X] emphatic, as II 12, 7. 

CVnPn] construed with Dia^OCn Kara (rovi<Tiv; cf. Jer. 11, 2. 26, 2. 

19. Dnxi] ' And>'i?' (emph.), — in spite of what I have done. 

G 2 

84 The First Book of Samuel, 

03^5 yi^riD Nin niTK] 'who is a saviour to you.' Xin after the relative 
sign, before a ptcp. or adj., as Gen. 9, 3 ^n Xin ItJ'X. Nu. 9, 13. 14, 
8- 27. 35, 31. Dt. 20, 20 nb'y N^n nK'K. Jer. 27, 9. Hag. i, 9. Ruth 
4, 15 : similarly Ez. 43, 19. So also in Aramaic, pjx ''T Dan. 7, 17 ; 
and in Targg., as II 20, 19. 24, 17. Is. 42, 18 ^ 

"•3 1^ nONni] ■'3 with the direct narration, as 2, 16 MT. (where see 
note). Several MSS. LXX, Pesh. Vulg. express ^ (as 8, 19 MT., 12, 
12 MT.), in which case ""a will, of course, = but. Either reading is 
admissible, but N7 is more pointed and forcible. 

'^"^ ''iD? la^'Tin] Take your stand, present themselves : cf. Jos. 24, i. 

D3''abN] not 'thousands' (EVV.), but tribal subdivisions, clans; cf. 
23, 23. Jud. 6, 15. Mic. 5, 2. 

20. "I37''"i] viz. by lot : cf. 14, 14+. Jos. 7, 16-18. 

21. """IDCriJ LXX adds koX Trpocrdyova-L rrjv (f)vX7]v Marrapi ets avSpa<; 
i.e. n'l^^b n^sn nnap'ro-nx nnpM (see Jos. 7, 17), which is required 
by the sense. 

22. 5J'''N D?n "iiy N3n] 'Is there still (i.e. besides ourselves) any one 
come hither ? ' The people are in despair ; and they inquire whether 
there is yet any one amongst them, of whom they are not aware. 
LXX, however, have Ei tpx^rai b av-qp evravOa ; and it is true, as We. 
remarks, that the answer ' Lo, /le is hidden,' etc., agrees better with 
the question, 'Is the man come hither (^^''xn D^n Nan)?' than with ' Is 
there still a man come hither .? ' Of course, with C'"'Nn, liy must be 
omitted. There are several cases in MT. of an article having acci- 
dentally dropped out, some {e.g. 14, 32) being already noted by 
the Massorah {Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 165 ; or the Mass. Magna on 
11 23, 9). 

Dv3n 7N] ?N, on account of the motion implied in N3n3 : 'he hath 
hidden himself /« among the baggage.' Cf. Jer. 4, 3b. 

24. taiTiN^n] When DJT'NI is coupled with the n inter rog., the 1 is 
regularly doubled (as signified by the dagesh dirwiens): so 17, 25. 
2 Ki. 6, 32 : GK. §§ 22^ (20^1), lool. 

"]^nn TT'] The same formula as II 16, 16. i Ki. i, 25 al. 

1 Comp., in Phoenician, Cooke, NSI. 27, 2 . . . riB' NH K'N (= Heb. NM "IB'X 
. . . riSB*). And so also in Arabic (Qor. 2, 58. 43, 51) and Ethiopic (Gen. 5, 32! 
14, 2 etc.). 

X. ig-XI. 2 85 

25. "iSDa] zzz'm a scroll,' in accordance with the principle explained 
on I, 4. So, with the same word, Ex. 17, 14; Nu. 5, 23 ; Jer. 32, 10. 
Job 19, 23. Comp. GK. § 126^; and on 19, 13. 

'31 m^i] Ex. 16, 33 '"' ^Js!) iriN mm. 34. 

26. ^••nn] LXX viol Swa/xewv i.e. ^''nn '•Ja = the men of valour (see 
Jud. 21, 10). "-ja has accidentally fallen out: ^TI means not a mere 
' band of men ' (A V.), but a military host — a sense that is not here 
appropriate. ^Tl ""33 denotes not merely men of valour, but men 
morally brave, loyal, and honest (Ex. 18, 21. 25): here the PTl ^12 
and the bT^2 ""Ja of ^'. 27 stand in evident contrast to one another. 

27*. ni] contemptim: cf. 21, 16. i Ki. 22, 27. 

nmio] of presents offered to a superior, as Jud. 3, 15. 2 Ki. 8, 8 f. 

10, 27^ — 11, 13. (14-) 15. Saul ,' does as his hand finds' (9, 7), wins 
a success against the Ammonites, and is made king at Gilgal by 
the people with acclamatioti {sequel to 9, i — 10, 16). 

27^. t^'nriDJ mm] MT. may to a certain extent be defended by the 
use of '3 r\>r\ in Gen. 19, 14^. 27, 12. Nu. 11, i. II 4, 10, though it 
is found mostly in connexion w^th ^T)32,, which justifies and explains 
the 3. LXX join the words to 11, i, rendering koI lyevrjO-q ws (Jtcxa 
fiTJm i.e. t2'"lhD3 ^Tp\, This is preferable to MT. The combination 
of 3 with a prep, is most uncommon (see on 14, 14): but it occurs 
with |0 in a phrase so remarkably similar to the present one as fully 
to justify it here : Gen. 38, 24 D"'dn \:h^^2 \nM and it came to pass 
after about three months. 

11, I. ly^: D'3^] The name ^y" still clings to Wddy Fabis, which 
falls into the Jordan from the East, 9 miles S. of Beth-shean : but the 
site of the ancient town itself is uncertain. Robinson and others have 
identified it with ed-Deir, on the S. side of Wady Yabis, 6 miles E. of 
the Jordan ; but Miryamin, 2 miles NVV. of ed-Deir, on the hills on the 
N. side of the Wady seems better to agree with Eusebius' description 
of it {Onom. 268, 81 f.) as 7 miles from Pella, on the road leading 
to Gerasa (see DB. and EB. s.v.). 

2. nxn] pointing forwards to "Ilp33 : ' On condition of this will 
I conclude a covenant with you, on condition of the boring out to you,' 
etc.; so Gen. 34, 22. 42, 15. 33. Ex. 7, 17. Is. 27, 9. The 7 of 

86 The First Book of Samuel, 

reference, as Gen. 17, 10. 34, 22; Lev. 26, 5. 26; Di. 23, 3^. j^; 

1 Ki. 14, 13 (comp. on 2, 33): Z^jir. 512^ (5 a). 

JTnSN] nna being understood, as 20, 16. 22, 8. 

-ipn] sc. Dnplin : GK. § 144^. e^ and on ch. 16, 4 (EVV. of course 
paraphrase). The same verb, also of boring out an eye, Pr. 30, 17, 
and (Pi.) Jud. 16, 21. 

iTriDtri] The fern, suffix = it: see GK. § 135P. 

3. \h flin] See on 15, 16. 

unx yK-ID ps DNi] The ptcp. in the protasis, as Gen. 24, 42 f., 
Jud. II, 9 al. {Tenses, § 137). 

yW UN^'^l] ^N NX"" of going out to surrender, as Is. 36, 16 "h^ INV. 

2 Ki. 24, 12 (with ^y = ^x). For i'lNtJ' ny3:, see on 9, i. 

7. Jud. 19, 29 i^xnc''' ^33 ^33 n^yk^•''1 . . . n-invy^ rrrw^. nn: is 

to divide by joints, esp. for sacrifice. Lev. i, 6. i Ki. 18, 23. 

D''3S^r:n] LXX D-DN/JD is better. 

inxi] """inx is far more frequently said in such phrases : yet see 
12, 14; and Lex. 29^. 

^"^ nna] the aive or terror ofYahweh: cf. Gen. 35, 5 (D^"^?^5 nriH). 

INVM] LXX i/SoTjcrav, a mistranslation of 'ipVif?!: so Jud. 7, 23. 24. 
I 2, I ; and even for DpyTJ 18, 23 : cf. avefSo-qcrav 2 Ki. 3, 21 ; dvejSrja-av 
(corrupted from avefSorjaav), ch. 13, 4. Jud. 10, 17; dve/??; (cod. Al. 
avefiorjcrev) for pWM 14, 20. W^)\ is probably to be restored here, 
1NX''1 having been suggested (Bu.) by the preceding N?f\ 

nriN tJ'''N3] a frequent expression: II 19, 15. Nu. 14, 15. Jud. 6, 16. 
20, I. 8. II. Ezr. 3, I = Neh. 8, it. 

8. p]2] now Idzik, 1 1 miles SW. of Beth-shean, and just opposite to 
W. Yabis. 

min^ K'''N')] ^''H construed collectively, as often in this and similar 
phrases, e.g. 9^. 13, 6. 14, 22. 17, 2 etc. 

9. n7:N''l] Read with LXX IDN''"!. 

nyitJ'n] relie/, deliverance: see on 14, 45 (nyitr''). 

nni] Better, with Qie and 34 MSS., Ons : cf. Gen. 18, i. II 4, 5. 

II. \^'Cif\ LXX, Pesh. express poy ""ja, in agreement with the all 
but universal custom of the OT. writers '. Except once in poetry 
(1^. 83, 8), the Ammonites are always known either as pDy ^■yi, or 

> Noldeke, ZDMG. 18S6, p. 171. 

XL 2-is 87 

(rarely, and mostly late) n''J'iDy. On the other hand, 3X10 ^JaS 
P^cy 'J3 never occur; D1>^ ""J^ occurs once, i//-. 137, 7. 

IVS""! DnNL^*:!! TTil] ' And it came to pass, as regards those that 
were left, that they were scattered.' An unusual construction : cf. 
however, 10, 11. II 2, 23: Tenses, § ^"^ note ; GK. § 116^. 

12. D'L'':Nn "Un . . . . "ir^xn ''O] 'Who is he that saith. Shall Saul 
reign over us ? give up the men that we may slay them.' A particular 
case of the idiom which may be most simply illustrated by Jud. 7, 3 
'^^\ *T).C'! '^"C ""*? ' Who is fearful and trembling ? let him return ' etc. = 
' Whoso is fearful and trembling, let him return ' etc. In this idiom ^o 
invites attention to a person of a particular character, in order after- 
wards to prescribe what he is to do (or what is to be done to him), or 
to state how he will fare. As in the example quoted, by a slight 
change of form in the sentence, *tD may be represented by whoso : but 
it is really a more expressive, less ordinary usage than that of whoso, 
whosoever 'vs\Y.w^\'a\\. Other examples : Ex. 24, 14; 32, 33; Dt. 20, 
5. 6. 7. 8; Jud. 10, 18 ; Is. 50, 8 bis; Jer. 49, 19; and followed by 
an imperative, Ex. 32, 24 Ipnsnn 3nT ""D? ' Who has gold ? Strip it off 
you!' cf. 26 'h\^ T\-\T\'h ■'O 'Who is for Yahweh.? (Come) to me!' 
\\f. 34, 13 f.'^ Comp. Lex. 567a g. 

IJvy "I^D^ ?1Nti'] The sense of the words is indicated by the tone in 
which they are uttered- — either affirmatively, in a tone of irony, or, 
more probably, interrogatively. So not unfrequently in Hebrew, as 

Gen. 27, 24 >n nr nriN; i Ki. i, 24; 21, 7 nai^o nj^'yn nny nnx 
^KitJ'"' ?y: ch. 21, 16. 22, 7. II 16, 17. Comp. on 16, 4. 25, 11 and 
II II, 11; and GK. § 150*. 

13b. II 19, 23. 

15. D"'DP{i^ DTint] So Ex. 24, 5. The words are in apposition, the 
second having the effect of specializing the sense expressed by the 
first: Tenses, Appendix, § 188. i; GK. § 131^. 

' Except once in late Hebrew, 2 Ch. 20, i. 

"^ Not to be confused (as is done by Delitzsch on ^.25,1 2) with the use of "D in 
xj/. 15, I. 24, 8. 10. Is. 33, 14. 63, I where the answer to 'JO is a substantive, not 
a verb, and describes the character of the person asked about. This usage is a figure 
peculiar to poetry, which, as the examples shew, is not the case with that explained 
in the text. 

88 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

12. Samuel's farewell to the people {sequel to 7, 2-17; 8; 
10, 1 7-2 7 a). 

12, I, Cf. for the phrases 8, 7. 22. It is evident that two accounts 
of the appointment of Saul as king, written from different points of 
view, though fitted together so as to supplement one another, have 
been combined in our present Book of Samuel. 9, i — 10, 16 (in 
which nothing is said of the unwillingness of Yahweh to grant a king) 
is continued by 10, 27b (LXX). 11, 1-13. 15 (note in particular the 
connexion between 10, 7 do that which thine hand shall find d>.ndi 11, 
5 flf.) and ch. 13 : the sequel of ch. 8 on the other hand is 10, 17-27* 
and ch. 12. The former narrative, with its greater abundance of 
details, is the earlier and more original: the latter in its main elements 
exhibits literary affinities with the Hexateuchal source E ', but it has 
probably in parts been expanded by a subsequent writer, whose style 
and point of view resemble those of the redaction of the Book of 
Judges, and to whom may be attributed, for instance, parts of ch. 12, 
especially the allusion in v. \2 to ch. ii (which is in fact a contra- 
diction, for the attack of Nahash was not the occasion of the people's 
asking for a king). The verse 11, 14 in the form in which it now 
appears seems intended to harmonize the two accounts, by repre- 
senting the ceremony at Gilgal as a renewal of Saul's appointment as 
king. The differences in style between the two narratives are very 

2. WJE^ ^PnnJD] used here in a neutral sense : see on 2, 30. 

3. ^T\\ir\ , » . Tip^v] The two words appear often in parallelism, as 
Dt. 28, 33. Am. 4, I. p^V is to oppress, in particular by defrauding 
a labourer or dependent of his due. 

13 . . . 123] 123 is the price of a life, the money offered for the life 
of a murdered man to appease a kinsman's wrath (cf DB. iii. 129). 
The imposition of a "iDn is permitted in the oldest legislation (Ex. 
21-23) in a particular case of homicide (21, 30); but as compensation 
for a murder (the Gk. ttoivi?), the payment of it is (in the Priests' 
Code) strictly prohibited (Nu. 35, 31 IC'N nvn •J'Sji? naa inpn N^ 

1 Budde, ZA TW. 1888, pp. 231-236 { = Richterand Samuel, 1890, pp. 180-185), 
•who, however (see the last paragraph on p. 248), does not claim to shew that the 
writer is identical viiih. that of E. Comp. LOT. 167-168 (edd. 6-8, 177-178). 

XII. 1-3 89 

T\yob yt^'l Nin). In the sense of an equivalent for a life conceived as 
forfeited, it occurs i/^. 49, 8. Is. 43, 3. In Am. 5, 12 the nobles of 
Samaria are denounced as 123 ^np7. This being the uniform usage 
of the word, it follows that what Samuel here repudiates is that he has 
ever as judge taken a money payment on condition of acquitting 
a murderer brought before him for justice. 

U ''y^ hhv^fS] 'that I might {Tefises, § 63) hide my eyes in it.' 
The sense of the metaphor is obvious: comp. W'T'^J niD3 Gen. 20, 16. 
LXX, however, has l^iXao-fxa Kai uTro8T]fjia ; dTroKpi9r]Te kut' efxou, koX 
drroSfLo-o) v/mv i.e. "•? ^^V ^y^V}) "123. The ' pair of sandals' is chosen 
by Amos (2, 6. 8, 6) as an example of a paltry article, for the sake of 
which the Israelite of his day would ' sell the poor : ' and Sir. 46, 19 
(in the praise of Samuel, with plain allusion to this passage), koI tt/oo 
KaLpov KOLfjiYjcreu)? atwvos iiref/xifyrvpaTO evavri xvptov kol )(pLa~rov Xpry/xaTa 
Kal Iws uTro8r]|jidTwi' oltto Tra(n]<s crapKo^ ovk ilXrj<fia' kol ovk eveKaAecrcv 
avrw av$pw7ro<;, has been held to shew (as the author — see the Pro- 
logue — wrote in Hebrew and was conversant with the OT. in Hebrew) 
that the reading existed in his day not merely in the LXX, but in the 
Hebrew text of Samuel. The objection to this view is that "|D3 and 
Dvyj do not agree very well together, and the sense required is ' or 
even a pair of sandals ' (so Th. : und (waren es auch nur) ein Paar 
Schuhe ?), which is hardly expressed by the simple copula : it may be 
questioned also whether a pair of sandals (which is mentioned by 
Amos as something insignificant) would be a bribe likely to be offered 
to a judge. The recently recovered Heb. text of Ecclus. (see Strack's 
Die Spriiche Jesus , des Sohnes Sirachs, 1903) has the same reading 
(U n:y vh ms ^21 ''n(np^ ^)^^ D^y:i 1213); but neither this nor the 
LXX is proof that it was the original Heb. reading here. But ''3 ijy is 
a good antecedent to D3? 3''C'N1 ; and Bu. may be right in supposing 
it to hzvQ/allen out after 13 ^ry. 

23? 3^C'Nl] must mean, ' and I will restore it to you ; ' for ' and 
I will answer you' (We.) the classical expression would be 2''B'N*1 
"13T D3ns (e.g. Nu. 22, 8), with an accus. of the person, and omission 
of "I3T only in poetry (as Job 13, 22), and in the late passage 2 Ch. 
10, 16 (n3T of I Ki. 12, 16 omitted). In another late book ^N y^\\ 
occurs in the same sense : Est. 4, 13. 15. Cf. Lex. 999''. 

Qo The First Book of Samuel, 

5. nr:N''l] sc. IDINH (on 16, 4). LXX, Pesh. Tg, Vg. would hardly 
render otherwise than by a plural, even though they read the verb 
in the singular: still the sing, is unusual : hence the note "V^D "IIOX"'!, 
i.e. "nDN'^l is thought or supposed (to be the true reading). n»N''1 
is also found in 19 MSS. In the Massoretic apparatus published 
by Jacob ben Hayyim in the large Rabbinical Bible edited by him 
in 1525, the note T3D occurs on about 190 passages'. Dr. Ginsburg 
in The Massorah, ii. (1883), 324-327 (arranged by books), 327-329 
(arranged alphabetically), adding the pTiDD noted in other MSS., was 
able to raise the number to about 240; and now, he states'^, he has 
collected altogether as many as 350. According to the common 
opinion the note points, to a conjectural reading*, which might be 
expected, from analogy, or from the context, to occur, but does not 
occur actually in the Massoretic text : but some scholars * are of 
opinion that these notes refer to the readings of actual MSS., not 
indeed agreeing with the MT., but preferred by the author (or authors) 
of the notes in question. The two explanations are not inconsistent 
with each other ; but if the latter be true, the value of the notes will 
be the greater, as many will then embody evidence as to the readings 
of Codices now no longer extant. Its probability, however, can only 
be tested by a systematic examination of all the p"i'2D that occur, 
and estimate of their value in individual cases. Both Heb. MSS. and 
Versions not unfrequently (but not always) agree with the reading 
suggested by a "lUD : but this is not proof that manuscript authority 
is actually referred to by it. Examples: on Ex. 26, 31 nt^y (in the 
Rabbinical Bibles) occurs the note ntJ'yn pT'nD '3, i.e. twice T\mr\ 

1 Only a section of these are noted in ordinary editions of the Hebrew Bible. 
The full Massoretic apparatus (on other matters as well as on this) is contained 
only in the large Rabbinical Bibles. The notes relating to the p"l"'2D, published 
by Jacob ben Hayyim, are collected and explained, and the passages referred to 
given, in Frensdorff's Massoretisches Worterhuch (1876), pp. 369-373. 

* Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, 1897, pp. 193, 194 f. 

* See e.g. Elias Leviia's Massoreth ha-Massoreth (1538), in Dr. Ginsburg's 
edition (text and translation), London, 1867, pp. 225-227. 

* Ginsburg in the Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 1877, 
p. 138, and the Heb. Bible, 1897, p. 187 ff. : Gratz, Die Psalmen (1882), 
pp. 115-117; comp. Geiger, Urschrift (1857), p. 253 f. 

XII . J- 91 

would be expected for Hki'y, and a reference is added to Ex. 25, 39. 
In both passages, the context would favour the second person ; and 
this is read in 26, 31 by 6 MSS. LXX, Pesh., and in 25, 39 by 3 MSS. 
Sam. and Pesh. (LXX omits). But each case must be examined 
upon its own merits : the correction suggested by the note is not 
always supported by the Versions, nor is it always in itself necessary \ 
The note in many cases relates to the number of a verb : thus, where 
MT. has ^{2''1, the pi. INS""! is eight times suggested, where it has "INQ"", 
N3"' is fourteen times suggested''. nCN"'') for "10X''1, as here, is sug- 
gested eleven times besides (see the Rabb. Bibles on Jud. 11, 15): 
viz. Ex. 14, 25. Nu. 32, 25. Jud. 8, 6. 11, 15. ch. 16, 4. 19, 22 : i Ki. 
20, 3. 2 Ki. 9, II. Hos. 12, 9. Zech. 6, 7 ^. The reader may examine 
these passages and consider in which of them the correction appears 
to him to be necessary *. The T'aD must be carefully distinguished 
from the ""ip : in no case does it direct the suggested alternative to be 
substituted in reading for that which is written in the text. It is true, 
however, as Ginsburg shews ^ that a reading which by one School 
of Massorites is called a T3D, is by another School sometimes called 
a Qre (as D3 for TO, in Is. 30, 32), and that it may even be the 
recognized ' Oriental ' reading (as Nu. 11, 21 D37 for Dni?; i S. 18, 25 
DN '•3 for '•3, — in both cases with the support of Western MSS.). 

List of P"1'3D in I-II Sam. as given in Ginsburg's Hebrew Bible (ed. i, 1894) : — 
I r, aS DJ 6 (for D31). So 2 Rabbinical quotations (Aptowitzer, II, p. 3). 
2, 13 (ed. 2, 191 1, and The Massorah, but not in ed. i) |JD for flK [7 MSS. 
De Rossi, i Baer (cod. Erf). Pesh. Targ. read HND ; see note ad loc.']. 

^ In some cases certainly the correction rests upon a false exegesis, as when n3 
for 13 is suggested in Ex. 4, 17; Dt. 24, 7 : in other passages the opinions of 
commentators differ; Ez. 2, 9, for instance, Cornill accepts ^3, Hitzig and Smend 
defend 13 . 

' See, on the passages, Frensdorff's note, p. 370 f. 

^ Only eleven passages are cited, though the number (elsewhere, as well as 
on Jud. II, 15) is stated as twelve. It is thought that Jud. 11, 19 may be the 
omitted passage : see Frensdorff, /. c. p. 370. In the lists in Ginsburg's Massorah, 
ii. pp. 325, 328, the twelfth passage is given as Jos. 24, 21. 

* Comp. also the notes on many of the pT3D cited above. — On I 27, 6 it is said 
"lUD pK in Jer. 5, 2 for |3? : so, probably rightly, 16 MSS., the St. Petersburg 
cod. of A.D. 916, and Pesh. 

* Introd., p. 187 ff. 

* Not in The Massorah. 

92 The First Book of Samuel, 

2, 20 1 (ed. 2) DDiprob for IDipob. So 10 MSS.2+ 2 on marg., and Pesh. 
12, s^- n?0X''1. So 18+ I (Appendix, De R.) MSS. LXX, Pesh. 

8 HD'^I^D. So I MS. Ginsb., i Kennicott, and i Rabb. quotation. 

16, 4 ')~I?0X''1. So c. 30 MSS., and 2 Rabb. quotations. 
4 T^Vn 1. So I MS. (Kenn.). 

20 nW^l ^. No MS. 

18, 14 733 (for 73?). So 18 MSS., and many Rabb. quotations. 

25 DN ""S (for tD). The Oriental reading. Also 9 MSS., and 3 Rabb. 

19, 10 Ninn. 2 MSS. Gi., 5 Kenn. 
22 "nCN''1 (2°). No MS. 

20, 8 DJ? (for by). 2 MSS. Kenn. (K. 154 = 0. i). 
25, 23 n>f-lN. So 7 MSS. 

27 nX'^nn '. So 25 + i (App.) MSS. The Orient, ""np (Baer, 105, 118). 
27, 6 p-by (for pb). I MS. (Gi.). 
II 3, 22 INl^ 2 MSS. Kenn. (K. 154 = 6. J). 
29 Syi^- So 10 MSS. 
35 INH""!. 2 MSS. Kenn. 

6, 1 1 nnn 1. No MS. 
13, 20 n'^nai. No MS. 

14, 19 CI (for C'N). 3 MSS. Kenn. 

17, 19 "-S (for ''JS). So 10 MSS. 

18, 29 Ql^K^n ^ So 15 MSS. De R. (in 3 the H deleted) + 3 Gi. 

19, 8 DN* "3 (for ^3). i MS. (Gi.). 

9 1J<3"'1 (for N2M, so. Dyn). i MS. Gi., 5 Kenn. 

22, 44 QilDy for ''Dy (^. 18, 44 Oy). So 4 MSS. + 2 Gi., and LXX. 

6. nin''] LXX Ma/DTV's Kuptos =''"'' ly, certainly rightly. 

riK^y] A difficult and anomalous use of niry. The explanation 
which is best in accordance with the general use of the verb is that 
of Keil : made Moses and Aaron to be what they were as leaders 
of men, the word being used not in a physical sense, but morally, of 
the position taken by them in history. (Ges. rendered constituit, 
appointed; but ntJ'y has this sense only when it is followed by a word 
implying office or function, as to make priests, i Ki. 12, 31 ; to make 
(or set up) D"'JyT'1 21S 2 Ki. 21,6: similarly II 15, i to establish chariots 
and horses.) 

7. DLSDCN] The Nif., properly reflexive, as "inDJ to hide oneself, 
acquires sometimes a reciprocal force, as tiQ'^3 to Judge one another, 

^ Not in The Alassorah. 

2 MSS. are cited from De Rossi, except where otherwise stated. 

XIL s-ir 93 

i. e. to plead or dispute together in judgement; so HDiJ to set right one 
another, i.e. to argue or reason together (Is. i, i8) : ^yi3 to counsel 07ie 
another, i.e. to take counsel together (i Ki. 12, 6 and often) : cf. GK. 

§ Si*^. 

'^ niplif ^3 HN] LXX prefix Kai dTrayycXw v/ttv = 03? '""T?^!- 
t3Q{^•3 is construed with an accus. in Ez, 17, 20 vVO DB' irix TlDDEr:! 
n ^yiO nC'N. But the construction is harsh ; and in all probability 
either l^yDn (so 9 MSS.) or l^yn ^y (so i MS.) should be read in Ez., 
and here the words expressed by LXX should be suppHed. '"> nipnx 
is, no doubt, a reminiscence of Jud. 5, 11. 

8. Ipyin . . . 15^X3] as 6, 6^. 

D-IVD] LXX add /cat eraTreiVwo-ev awrovs AtyvTrros = ^^^IVP O'lSy^l 
(not Dr??!l Th. We.: see Ex. i, 12. Dt. 26, 6. II 7, 10 Hebrew and 
LXX). The words are needed on account of the following ipyn : 
a copyist's eye passed from the first D''1VD to the second. 

Dn''B'"'l] expresses just what Moses and Aaron did not do. LXX 
KttTWKio-ev, Pesh. olo/, Vulg. collocavil = D?T'l (the subject being 
God). The unpointed D3*^''1 has been filled in wrongly in MT. 

9. l3D"'l] This figure is used first in the 'Song of Moses,' Dt. 32, 
30 : and adopted thence by the Deuteronomic redactor of the Book 
of Judges, who uses it often in the frame-work into which he fits the 
narratives incorporated by him in his Book (Jud. 2, 14. 3, 8. 4, 2. 
10, 7 [rather differently in the older narrative 4, 9]). Chapters 7, 8, 
12 of I Sam. have affinities in style with the redactional elements 
of the Book of Judges. 

-livn xa^' Tki'] LXX express ni:;n "l^D P2^ xnv l^r, which is more 
in accordance with Hebrew usage. 

10. *iCN''l] Here, where ipyn closely precedes, the sing, is corrected 
by the Massorah into the plural ('p liCN'-l). 

11. p3] No judge or deliverer of this name is elsewhere mentioned. 
Ewald regarded p3 as an abbreviation of X^y<i J"<^- ^2, isff. : but 
some better known hero is likely to have been referred to. LXX, 
Pesh. have p~i2. Baraq, it is true, is mentioned in Judges before 
Gideon ; but between Gideon and Jephthah no suitable name can be 
suggested : and the order in v. 9 is not chronological. Targ. and 
Jews explain of Samson, treating i^3 fancifully as = p p. 

94 The First Book of Samuel, 

i'NirDB' nxi] Pesh. and Lucian pt^DK' nsi : probably a correction. 
The passage, of course, does not report the ipsissima verba of Samuel : 
the speech is the work of the narrator, and indeed, in this part, 
appears to have been expanded by a later editor, who has forgotten 
that it is Samuel himself who is speaking. The allusion is to the 
success narrated in ch. 7. 

n03] An accus., defining the state, ' in confidence, security:' GK. 
§ 118Q. So Dt. 12, 10; and in poetry Dt. 33, 28. Pr. i, 33 al.: but 
n^37 is the usual expression (Lev. 25, 18. 19. Jud. 18, 7. i Ki. 

5, 5 al.). 

12. '•^ n»Nni] LXX, Pesh. omit 'h. "'J nb = Nay, but a.s 2, 16 
Qre ; II 16, 18. 24, 24 al. 

13. Dn^SK' T^a Dnini ne'N] Cf. 8, 18 : ba^ is used of the request 
for a king in 8, 10. Nevertheless Dn^Nl^' IK^X appears here to be 
superfluous, and is probably to be omitted with LXX. 

Dn^Kt^] GK. §§ 44'i, 64^. 

14. The whole verse consists of the protasis, ending with an aposio- 
pesis. (nnx or) nnx riTl = to follow after, as Ex. 23, 2. II 2, 10. 
I Ki. 12, 20. 16, 21. Thenius is bold enough to affirm that inx riM 
is ' not Hebrew,' and accordingly would insert D''D^in before "inx after 
LXX : not only, however, is this needless in itself, but, as We. remarks, 
the position of -jropevofjiivoi in the Greek shews that it merely represents 
a corruption of DDTIPN. 

15. n33 ''' T nmrn] Cf. Ex. 9, 3. Dt. 2, 15. Jud. 2, 15. 
DSTnaNil] Since 'and against your fathers' gives an unsuitable 

sense, and the passages in which 1 means, or appears to mean, as * are 
dissimilar, there is no alternative but to accept LXX DDBppni in place 

1 In the formulation of proverbs, where the relation y^ijOT which the comparison 
is deduced stands in the second place (rare) : Job 5, 7 For man is born to trouble 
and sparks fly upwards (i.e. both effects happen similarly); 12, 11. More com- 
monly the opposite order is employed: Pr. 25, 25 Cold waters to a thirsty soul 
and good news from a far country; 26, 3. 9. 14 A door turns upon its hinges and 
a sluggard upon his bed ; 27, 21 : cf. ^. 19, 5 MT. {Lex. 253*j). Even supposing 
that the passage could, on other grounds, be treated as an example of the first 
of these usages, the same verb will he must obviously govern both clauses : the 
substitution of it was in the second clause destroys entirely the parallelism of idea 
upon which the idiom itself essentially depends. 

XII. 11-22 95 

of DDTIIDNQI : the mention together of ' you ' and ' your king ' agrees 
both with V. 14 and v. 25^'. MT. will be a lapsus calami, perhaps 
due to a reminiscence of vv. 6-8. 

16. •^??'y] 'is about to do.' The/ui. instans (on 3, 11). 

17. ni^p] 'voices,' viz. of Yahweh, in accordance with the Hebrew 
conception of a thunderstorm (^. 18, 11-14) : so Ex. 9, 23. 28 al.: 
of. i/'. 29 throughout. 

^NK'^] in regard to asking: in our idiom, 'in asking' (though PX^3 
would never be used in Heb.). So v. 19, and often, as 14, 33. Gen. 
18, 19. 2 S. 13, 16; cf GK. § 1140. 

20. Dnx] emphatic : '■ye, indeed, have done this evil : only ("IN) do 
not go further, and turn aside from Yahweh into idolatry.' 

21. o] Intrusive and meaningless: cf. the similar untranslatable ""3 
in 2 Ch. 22, 6 (2 Ki. 8, 29 rightly |d). The word is not represented 
in LXX. Ehrlich, however, remarks that nnx "1ID is nowhere said ; 
and suggests that "i^ may be a mutilated fragment of HSp p, — with IID, 
as Dt. ir, 28. 28, 14. 

innn] The primary idea of inn is difficult to seize ; but probably 
the ideas associated with it were those oi formlessness, confusion, un- 
reality, emptiness: in the Versions it is mostly represented by k(.v6v, 
ov8iv, /xaraiov, inane, vacuum, vanum. It thus denotes the formlessness 
of the primaeval earth (Gen. i, 2 'and the earth wz.?, formless and 
empty'), and of a land reduced to a formless chaos (Jer. 4, 23: cf. 
Is. 34, 1 1), — in each of these passages being parallel to ^nla emptiness : 
in Job 26, 7 (inn by pSX neb) etripty space; it then comes to mean 
empty, unsubstantial, unreal, and is used of a groundless argument or 
consideration (Is. 29, 21 p^"^X 'nhn ^t3*1)^ of moral unreality, or false- 
hood (Is. 59, 4 inn by niDZl), of something unsubstantial (Is. 40, 17 
lb ir^'m ^nni DQXD, 23 rim 'inn? px ^^ip); and so here oi idols ; 
cf. Is. 41, 29 Dn''3D3 inni nn 'their molten images are wind and 
hollowness,' 44, 9 inh Db3 bD| ''^T^, with 'profit not' in the following 
clause, exactly as here. See further Lex. s.v. 

ib'^yv N? n^i'N] Jeremiah's expressions are similar: 2, 8 N? ^nx 

labn ib'-yv (cf. v. n); 16, 19 b'lyiD d3 pNi ban; cf. also Is. 44, 9. 10. 

57, 12 — -all of false gods or idols. 

22. bnan IDEJ'] Jos. 7, 9 : also Jer. 44, 26. Ez. 36, 23. 

96 The First Book of Samuel, 

7^Nin] 'hath willed:' see on II 7, 29. 

23. ""aJN] k casus pendens : cf.Gen.24, 27. Is. 45, 12^; GK. § 135^. 
NDnr^] The inf. after ''7 nphn, expressing the act deprecated, is 

regularly construed with |tD, Gen. 18, 25. 44, 7. ch. 26, 11: not 
'Far be it (lit. Ad profanum sit : see Lex.)/ro7n me that I should sin ! ' 
but 'Far be li/or me ! so that I should not sin (lit. away from sinning).' 
''""'D^ is parallel with Nt^niO, and dependent like it upon h n?vn. 

naiDH "jm] Comp. 2 Ki. 20, 13 mon itdi? (but Is. 39, 2 \o^r\ 
lion) ; Jer. 6, 20 ait^n njp. See above on_j6^_^ But there is no 
reason why here we should not punctuate "^"T}^ (Klo. Bu. Sm. Now.; 
GK. §126^). 

24. INT] foriN")^, as Jos. 24, 14. \p. 34, 10. See GK, § 7500. 
7l3n] the 'inwardly transitive' or 'internal' Hif'il (GK. § 53'i) 

hath shexvn or exhibited gXQ2Xxvt^'&. With Dy, as >\i. 126, 2. 3. 

25. ison] shall be jxc^/i/ away (not ' consumed,' EVV.) : cf. 26, 10. 
27, I. Gen. 19, 15. Nu. 16, 26. 

13 ; 14. The Philistines in the heart of the Israelite country : Saul 
and fonathafi's successes against them : concluding summary of 
SauVs other wars, and notice of his family {sequel to 9, i — 10, 16 ; 
10, 2 7^—11, 15). 

13, I. hsti^ n3C> p] nJK' p in accordance with Hebrew idiom can 
mean only a year old (Ex. 12, 5 and often). And so Lucian's recen- 
sion of LXX rios hiavTov SaouX^; Symm. (with an explanatory ws) 
vios ws evtavVtos ; Targ. 'f?l2 n:D ijIK^ pnin nn n''i?n NJtJ' "133 as a child 
a year old, in whom are no sins, was Saul when he became king (!). 

In form, the verse is of the type followed regularly by the compiler 
of the Book of Kings in stating the age of a king at his accession, and 
the length of his reign (e.g. i Ki. 14, 21. 16, 11. 22, 42, etc.: similarly 

^ Explained by Theodoret (quoted in Field's Hexapla, ad loc.) in the sense 
of Symm. and the Targ. : ricDj vor^Ttov to, vios iviavrov laovK Iv rw 0a(jt\eveiv 
avrov ; 'O 'Svfifxaxos ovtws k^tbwKiV vlbs wv (al. ws) haavaios fv ru paaiXivftv avTov. 
Arj\oT S« TOVTo TTjv dnkoTTiTa tjjs ipvx^js fjv ei'xf ^ SaouA. fjviKa t^s PaaiXdas rfji/ 
XfipoToviav (Se^aro. lavTT) 51 ovk knl TrXiiarov kxfrqaaro, kt\. On the version 
of Symmachus, as exhibiting the influence of current Jewish exegesis, see e-pecially 
Geiger's essay on this translator in the Jiidische Zeitschrift, i. (Breslau, 1862), 
p. 49 ff. ; and cf. Hexapla in the Diet, of Christian Biography, iii, 20. 

XII. 22—XIIL 2 


II 2, lo. 5, 4): no doubt therefore the number denoting Saul's age 
was originally intended to have a place between p and rxw, although, 
for some reason, the text as it stands is deficient ^ In clause b, also, 
Di3t>> >T\^ can hardly be correct : to say nothing of the fact that the 
history seems to require a longer period, D''Jt^ TIC' (in spite of D''?^J "TlK') 
is not said in Heb. for ' two years :' we have indeed ^''^^ Q^J?^ II 2, 10. 
2Ki. 2i,i9(=2 Ch. 33, 2i)t; but the regular expression is D^nj?^ 
(Gen. II, 10. II 14, 28. I Ki. 15, 25. 16, 8 al.). If with Keil we 
suppose 1 '^Cnt^^y to have fallen out, the form of QTi:' TlB' must be 
supposed to have been altered, and we must restore, in accordance 
with usage, n:^ D^ritJ'1 Qniry. The entire verse is not represented 
in LXX, and it is quite possible that it is only a late insertion in the 
Hebrew text, — originally perhaps a marginal note due to one who 
desiderated in the case of Saul a record similar to that found in 
the case of subsequent kings. 

2. ^X-iji'iD D''S^X ncr^:^] 'LXX, Syr. express vien after 3000. 

1 Three or four MSS. of LXX read vlos rpiaicovTa kiSiv : but in view of the age 
at which Jonathan, almost immediately after Saul's accession, appears, a higher 
figure seems to be required. 

* Not, as Keil writes, 3 . There is no ground for supposing (as is sometimes 
done) that in ancient times numerals were represented in Hebrew MSS. by the 
letters of the alphabet. If the numerals were not written in full, but expressed by 
symbols, the ancient Hebrews, it is reasonable to suppose, would have adopted 
a system similar to that in use amongst their neighbours, found equally in 
Phoenician, Palmyrene, Nabataean, and Old Aramaic inscriptions, and used also 
in Syriac. This system may be seen exemplified in detail in Euting's Nabatdische 
Inschriften aus Arabien (1885), P- 9^ f-, in the Table attached to Plate LXXIV 
of the Facsimiles of Manuscripts and Inscriptions {Oriental Series'), published by 
the Palaeographical Society under the editorship of Professor W. Wright (London, 
1875-83)) or in Lidzbarski, Nordsem. Epigraphik (1898), p. 198 ff., and the 
Table at the end of his Atlas of Plates. These Tables shew in what manner 
symbols which at first sight appear distinct, are in reality connected with one 
another by intermediate Imks. The first ten numerals in Phoenician are |, H, |j|, 

\iii> mil, III ill, Minn, iiiiiiii, in in in, -^\ 20 is =; or /y; 21 is 1=; or 

I /y; 30 is ^/y; 40 is /y/y; 90 is -^/y/y/y/y, etc. The notation by means of 
letters of the alphabet is found on Phoenician coins (but not the earliest), on the 
coins of Simon Maccabaeus, and since mediaeval times has been in general, though 
Hot universal, use (not, for example, in the Epigraph of the St. Petersburg MS. of 
A.D. 916, or in the Epigraphs of many other MSS.). 

1365 H 

98 The First Book of Samuel, 

Perhaps t;'''X has dropped out after D''Q^N on account of its resem- 
blance to 'c^"'D in !jN"it^''» ' (Dr. Weir). 

'{ycaoa] Michmas (Is. 10, 28), now Muhmds (1980 ft.), was 2 miles 
NE. of Geba' (see the next note but one), from which it was separated 
by the upper part of the valley, which a little lower down begins to 
have steep rocky sides, called now the Wddy es-Suwenit (see p. 106). 

i'X"n''3 "in] the hill-country of Bethel, now Beitin, \\ miles NW. 
of Michmas. The road from Muhmas makes an ascent of 900 ft. 
through Der Diwan (2370 ft.) to Beittn (2890 ft.), 

X'ry^'^l nya:3] Read po^^n ynja, as v. 16. Gibeah (see on 9, i) 
was the modern Tell el-Ful, 3 miles N. of Jerusalem : Geba (which 
Is. 10, 29 shews was distinct) was the modern Jeba (2220 ft.), on 
the south side of the Pass of Michmas (13, 16. 14, 5), 3 miles NE. 
of Gibeah ; and the two places, owing to the similarity of their names, 
are several times confused in MT. pD''33 y23 recurs i Ki. 15, 22. 

3. 2''XJ] See on 10, 5. 

yarn] Read with LXX, Targ., nynaS: see 10, 10 (cf. 6). 

D"'i3yn lyoK'"'] Let the Hebrews hear! viz. the news, and the order, 
implied in the proclamation, to come and join Saul in the war, which 
of course must now follow. V. 4 then describes how the report spread 
among the people, and induced them to respond to Saul's invitation. 
But D"'"i3yn is strange in SauVs mouth : and LXX express ^VlpB "ltoi<.^ 
D'^liyn 'saying. The Hebrews have revolted' (2 Ki. i, i). This, if 
correct, will of course be in its proper place after D''n:i'?D "iy0C'''1 in a, 
and pNH b'22. "iDlira ypn hxK'l will connect, and connect well, with 
V. 4 (see Jud. 6, 34^). So substantially We., who, however, instead 
of assuming a transposition of the words from clause a, regards their 
incorrect position as indicating that originally they were a marginal 
gloss. This conclusion, however, is not necessary (Sm. Bu. Now.). 

4. '1 ^i^l'i] lit. made itself malodorous against (= was in bad odour 
with) : so II 10, 6; sq. JiN {with, i.e. towards) II 16, 21. 

5. CtJ'^t^] The number of chariots is disproportionately large : no 
doubt DK'i'^ is an error for m\>f (so LXX (Luc.) and Pesh.). 

'y\ ^ina] Jos. 11, 4. Jud. 7, 12. 

m?] in regard to muchness: ?, as often, introducing the tertium 
comparationis {Lex. 5146, b')\ cf. Gen. 41, 19. Ex. 24, 10. 

XIIL 2-7 


l^y^] from the low-lying Philistine plain ; presumably up the Vale 
(pDy) of Aijalon, past the two Beth-horons (on v. i8), and across the 
elevated plateau on which Bethel stands (G. A. Smith, H. G. 250- 
cf. 251, 210 f., 291). 

pN-nn nonp] Beth-aven was W. (NW. : see the Map) of Michmas, 
near Ai, E. (SE.) of Bethel (Jos. 7, 2), and the N. border of Judah ran 
up from it to Bethel (Jos. 18, 12 f.); but its exact site is not known. 

6. iNn] the plur. after the collective tJ'^N is in itself unexceptionable 
(Jud. 9, 55. 15, 10. 20, 17. 20b. 33. 36b 48. 2 S. 20, 2b: but LXX 
have the sing, in 9, 55. 20, 33. 36b 2 S. 20, 2b); but LXX elSev 
presupposes HKi, and this is supported by the following if) nv. The 
sing, after the collective is also very common: Jud. 7, 23. 24b 12 j 
20, 20a. 41 {/er). 21, 1. I S. 14, 24. 17, 25 al. (but LXX have the plur' 
in Jud. 7, 23. 20, 20a. 41, second and third times). 

n^mnai] msf/es (2 Ki. 14, 9) are unsuitable: read with Ewald 
{ms/. iii. 44 [E.T. 31]), Th, We. etc. Dninn^, as 14, n. Caves 
abound in the rocky sides of the lower part of Wady es-Suwenit. 

D^nnv] Only besides in Jud. 9, 46. 49, of some part of the temple 
of nnn ba, in which the Shechemites took refuge, and which was 
burnt upon them, though what part precisely is not clear. In Arabic 
^j-; means a fower or Io//y building (Qor. 40, 38), %^ (with ^) 
a narrow excavation for the body at the bottom of a grave {Moore, fudges, 
p. 266)': the former suggests an idea which is here not probable;' 
but if nn^ had some less special sense than '.^i, such as under- 
ground cavity, it would suit at least this passage. 

7*. Dnnyi] We.'s objections to nnay are well-founded. The word 
does not express 'some of the Hebrews;' and as v. 7 carries on the 
thought of V. 6, there is no ground for the repetition of the subject 
Dnny, and its emphatic position before the verb: a verb coordinate 

1 Also used similarly in the Nabataean Inscriptions (Barth, AJSL Tuly 07 
273) found at Madain-Salih by Mr. Doughty (No. 8, lines 4, 5), and (re-)edited 
by Euting, Nabatdtsche Inschriften (1885), of a sepulchral chamber: see No. .5 

(= Cooke, NSL No. 91), line 4 np^m NHnvi xiD^ p pin pn^n nD3D-lNh 

N^niJI XmnrO N^m: p 'and to Arisoxe belong two-tiirdl of the tomb and the 
scpdchral chamber; and her share in the niches is the east side, with the niches 
there, etc. ; with Noldeke's note, p. 55. See also Cooke, No. 94, i (from Petra). 

H 2 

loo The First Book of Samuel, 

with 1N3nn''1 V. 6 is what would be expected. For )~\2V D''"i3yi 
pT'iTriN he conjectures accordingly, with but slight changes, linyi 
n"l\"I nn3]i?p ' and //ley passed over the fords of Jordan.' This is 
a decided improvement, except that Tinyi should be "nayi. This, 
however, lessens the similarity to D''"i3yi : hence Klo.'s clever suggestion 
il Dyi for onayi is probably best: 'and much people passed over 
Jordan ' (so Bu. Sm.). For the frequent confusion of 3 and D in old 
Heb. MSS., see Introd., § 5. 2. 

^b_iga. First rejection of Saul at Gilgal {comp. lo, 8). 

7^ hib:2] See 10, 8. 

innx nnn] pregnantly (cf. nx-ip!? inn 16, 4, h>^ 'n Gen. 42, 28) = 
followed him trembling. We. conjectured plausibly 1''in?^^, which is 
also expressed by Luc. (dTro oTna-Oev airov) : trembledyri?;;? after him = 
forsook him trembling : so Now. Dh. Bu., however, prefers MT., 
pointing out that VinXJD is tautologous with 8^. 

8. bn>')] The Kt. is ^nj»1 (TV/.) as Gen. 8, 12 (not the PzW ^n:^l, 
which is confined to poetry). The Qre is -'Hi'l {fff), as 10, 8 ; 
II 18, 14. 

i'NIDB' "W^ii] "^-{cs-sd*,? is good Aramaic, but ^NIDK' "iti'K is not 
good Hebrew, in the sense ' of Samuel.' A verb has dropped out. 
^5?^ or ny) (see II 20, 5) is suggested by Ges. (Lg. p. 851) and Keil : 
"^^"^ (Gen. 21, 2) or "ipx (ib. 22, 2^), the latter of which might easily 
fall out after IB'X , is expressed by LXX, Targ. : but the word 
which might drop out most readily is D'^ (see Ex. 9, 5) before i'NlDti' 
(so 5 MSS.)j so also Dr. Weir. Comp. Ew. § 292I3 note. 

|*S*l] The Hif. of pD is always causative, except here, Ex. 5, 12. 
Job 38, 24. Probably Qal should be read each time, i.e. here f^QJl. 

Ivytt] from beside, from with: so 2 Ki. 25, 5 with the same verb, 
Cf. 28, 1 4 footnote; Lex. 759*. 

II. ^3] recitativtwi : see on 2, 16. 

r??] Nif. from Y%^, which does not occur, but is assumed to be 
a parallel form of p^ : GK. § ey^d But probably f^ (Nif. from the 
ordinary form, pS) should be read. Notice the emph. nnsi. 

B^»3»] not at Michmas (on i, 24), but to Michmas, CDDW im- 
plying motion. 

XIIL 7-7/ loi 

12. ni''] Gilgal (lo, 8) being in the Jordan-valley, some 2600 ft. 
below Michmas (vv. 5. 11). 

psxnxi] GK. § 54k 

13. nny ""J] nny ""a as a rule introduces the apodosis after 'h (e.g. 
Nu. 22, 29 : Tenses, § 144), nnj? having the force of /« that case: and 
hence Hitzig, We. Bu. etc. would point here ri^Di:' Np (so II 18, 12; 
19, 7) for nyo^ N^. This is preferable, though not perhaps necessary ; 
for nny might presumably refer to a condition implied, without being 
actually expressed. Cf. Ex. 9, 15 where, though the context is 
differently worded, nny equally refers to a condition which must be 
inferred from v. \\\ 'For in that case (viz. if such had not been 
my purpose), I should have put forth my hand, and smitten thee 
and thy people,' etc.; and Job 3, 13. 

^k] = ^y, which would be more usual : comp. 2, 34. 3, 12. 5, 4. 6. 
6, 15. 14, 34 (contrast 33). 16, 13 (contrast 10, 6). 23 (16 ^y). 17,3.51. 
18, 10. 19, 9. 16. 20, 25 (by the side of hyi). 22, 13 (8 i?y). 27, 10 
(^N after Jjy twice). II 2, 9 (thrice ^N followed by thrice ^y in the same 
sentence), 6, 3. 8, 7 etc.: 20, 23* (23^ and 8, 16 i'y). 24, 4. So 
sometimes in other books, esp. in Jeremiah. Cf. Lex. 41*^. 

^y where ^X would be more usual is less comm.on : but see on i, 10 
and add II 14, i. 17, 11. 

14. 132^3 K^^x] So Jer. 3, i5t, of the ideal rulers of the future: 
^3^3 D'^yi 03^ ^nnji. 

15. ^y"!"!] See on z;. 12 ; and cf. Jud. 2, i. After ^Jj^jn p something 
appears to have dropped out of the narrative. In v. 4 Saul is at 
Gilgal, and remains there during the scene 9-14; mv. 16 he appears 
suddenly abiding (3K'V) at Gibeah. A clause describing his departure 
from Gilgal and arrival at Gibeah is thus desiderated. LXX has such 
a clause, continuing, viz. after 7J73n p [^ eis oSov avrov"^, koX to Kara- 
Xififxa Tov Xaov avijir] OTrtcroi %aovX eis airavT-qfTLV oiriaoj tov Xaov tov 
TToX^fjLKTTOv. avTwv Trapay€vofi€Vwv e/c raXyaAwvJ eis VajSaa Bevta/Aetv, 
ktX. This may be accepted in substance, though not quite in the 
form in which it here appears, (i) 13"n^ following, as it would do byi. 

^ These words do not stand in Tisch.'s text, but they form part of the text of B, 
and are printed in Dr. Swete's edition. We.'s conjecture, therefore (made in 
1871), that ' eh oSov airov has probably fallen out,' is entirely confirmed. 

I02 The First Book of Samuel, 

would give rise to a phrase not in use (iDini? I^J^i is always said). 
(2) eis a.'Ka.vrr](TLv ottlo-w represents a non-Hebraic combination (though 
adopted, without misgiving, by Th.). (3) avrCyv irapay., if it repre- 
sents, as it seems to do, D^NB Dn rnust be followed by Ips ^NL'^I, not 
as MT. by ^lNt^» npD"'1 (so always: see Tenses, § 169). The following 
text will satisfy the conditions of Hebrew style: ^yi ^Nint:' Dp"""! 
[^K>JK or] Dyi nxnpb b=ixc' nnx n^y oyn im nsinS tiS'i] ^3^3n-p 
'y\ po-ja nyn: [^aSan fj? ^NaM. nDnbsn. The omission" in MT. is 
evidently due to the recurrence of ija^JiTID. 

16. The Philistines had expelled Saul from Michmas {v. 5^; cf. 
V. 2), and he had retired to Geba', where Jonathan already was (v. 2). 

17. nTlB'Dn] So 14, 15. Probably a technical expression, denoting 
{ZAW. 1907, 59) the part of an army employed in ravaging and 
destruction: cf. esp. Jer. 22, 7 (cutting down trees); also 46, 22. 
Ez. 9, i^. 21, 36. Ew. {Hist. iii. 33 n.) compared J-^j^tfl , of a body of 
raiders (Lane, 2307). 

D''ErNT \W7^'\ as three columns, an accus. defining the manner in 
which T\''rWDn issued forth: Ew. § 279c; GK. § ii8q, Cf. 2 Ki. 5, 2 
Dnna INV^ D1N1 came out as marauding bands. 

nnN] the numeral without the art., being definite in itself: see GK. 
§§ i2 6«, 134I ; and cf. on i, 2. Notice the frequentative mS''. 

nnsy] According to Jerome, 'Ophra was 5 miles E. of Bethel, 
whence it has been generally identified with et-Taiyibeh (2850 ft.), 
4 miles NE. of Bethel (2890 ft.), and 5 miles to the N. of Michmas 
(1980 ft.). Cf. Jos. 18, 23; and on II 13, 23. 

i'yiB' px] LXX SwyaA. Unknown. 

18. Upper Beth-horon, now Bet-'Hr elf oka (2020 ft.), was 10 miles, 
as the crow flies, W. of Michmas. Lower Beth-horon, now Bet-vir 
et-tdhta (13 10 ft.), was i| miles WNW. of Upper Beth-horon. The 
'way' to Beth-horon from Michmas would be to the NW., past 
D8r Diwan (2370 ft.), up to Bethel (2890 ft., — 900 ft. above 
Michmas), and then on to the west. 

7"l3an] The north border of Benjamin ran up from Jericho to 

^ ncriPDn CK'JN or) Oy is a phrase that occurs in Joshua, but not elsewhere in 
I-II Sam. This, however, is not decisive against its originality here. 

XIII. i6-2o 103 

near Ramah (on 10, 2); so it would pass, presumably, near Michmas\ 
But "jm 'the way /c,' suggests a particular place, not a line; and 
5lp6^'J^ {that leans out over : see Nu. 21, 20. 23, 28) would be more 
naturally said of a height than of a border. LXX Ta/See points to 
ny^an ' the hill ' (not the place of that name) ; and this ought pro- 
bably to be read, with 'ISJ^K'iin for PjpK'jn. The 'wilderness' meant 
will be that consisting of the hills and wadys sloping down eastwards 
into the Jordan-valley (see the next note): cf. Jud. 20, 47 'into /ke 
wilderness, to the crag of Rimmon ' (3I miles N. of Michmas). 

Cyavn "•:] the Ravine of the Hyaenas. The Wady es-Suwentt 
(see on v. 2), at about 5 miles below Michmas, on the SE., runs into 
W. Farah, and 2 or 3 miles below the point of juncture, there is a 
valley called Wddy Abu-Babd, running from the SW. into W. Farah. 
This, however, seems an insignificant valley : perhaps (Buhl, Geogr. 98) 
D''y3X ''J was the ancient name of W. Farah itself (which to the east 
of this point is now known as W. Kelt). There is a road, about 
2 miles north of W, Farah (see the large PEF, Map), leading straight 
down from Michmas into the Jordan-valley, which may be the road 
here meant. The y33 (or rather nyaj) may have been a hill near this 
road, overlooking W. Farah or W. Kelt. Cf. H. G. p. 291 n. 

19. ^^'&\ frequentative, just as (e.g.) Gen. 31, 39. 

. . , JD "IJ^N '•3] the same idiom, implying always that steps are 
taken to prevent what is feared from taking place, 27, 11. Gen. 31, 31 
(comp. 26, 7). 42, 4. Ex. 13, 17. x\,. 38, 17 al. 

ion] Qre "iiON. See Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 119^, where eighteen 
cases of an omitted 1 at the end of a word are enumerated, several 
(e.g. Jud. 21, 20. I Ki. 12, 7) similar to this. See further in the 
Introduction, p. Ixii f. 

20. 1*'"1,M] Point rather, with Klo., '''T),''^, with a freq. force (on 
I, 3), in agreement with N^C v. 19, and nriTII v. 21. 

DTiti'i'Dn] ' LXX eis yr}v dXXocfivXoiv. Ought we not to read 7X 
D^riB'^sn (from 'pSnB'*) or possibly [so Bu. Sm.] nyns ? ' (Dr. Weir.) 

1 2 Ki. 23, 8 ' from Geba' to Beer-sheba ' implies that Geba' was on the N. border 
of the Southern Kingdom; cf. Zech. 14, 10. 

' Or, in the Rabbinical Bibles, the Mass. magna on i Ki. I, i, or the Final 
Massorah, letter 1, No. 18. 

I04 The First Book of Samuel, 

inB'i.rno] LXX render this by Spi-Travov, Pesh. by l^rr>rnv> (ox-goad), 
both words bemg used in z*. 21 to represent 'i2-\1il. Probably, there- 
fore, I33"n should be read here for *iriB'"}.TO. The two verses will then 
agree in the implements enumerated; and the repetition of almost 
the same word (iri^"inp, iriK'inp) in one and the same verse will be 
avoided, Symm. St/ceXXa, viattock (so EVV.), 

31. D''3 m''i*Sn] These words are hopelessly corrupt. They are 
rendered conventionally bluntness 0/ edges : but (i) the plur. of ns 
is elsewhere nVD; (2) the meaning bbmtftess, viewed in the light of 
the sense which the root ")V2 elsewhere expresses, is extremely doubt- 
ful^; (3) the construction is grammatically inexplicable (m''XSn for 
m"'VQ). Ci'iQn •T'ifSn (inf. Bif. with the force of a noun — rather "i''?fSLi, 
Ew. § 1 56c), suggested by Keil, would lessen the grammatical anomaly, 
but does not really remove the difficulty which the words present. 
LXX 6 TpvyrjTos for n'T'VQn presupposes almost the same word ("i"'Wn) ; 
but their rendering of the clause koL rjv 6 rpvyrjTO's Itoi/xos tov Oepi^eiv 
supplies no basis for a satisfactory restoration of the text. AV. Ji/e 
is derived immediately from the Jewish commentators, Rashi, and 
David Kimchi : its ultimate source is merely the conjectural rendering 
of Targ. Pesh. (n:''D1B'). 

])^bp ^b^b^] Another crux. ])^b\> occurs in the Targ. of Qoh. 
12, II (=Heb. nnjpV'ip): but possibly it may be only borrowed 
from the present passage: it is not cited as occurring elsewhere 
in Aramaic, or post-Bibl. Hebrew. Still the root (see Levy) has in 
Aramaic the sense of demg thin (hence Nu. 7, 13 Ps.-Jon. a silver 
charger ^'h'p i<n^''JT of thin plate), so there remains the possibility 
that jiti'bp may have been in use to denote a fine poiyit. In that case 
ptJ'bp ^b^ will be a sort of compound = tridens. But such a com- 
pound in Hebrew is by no means free of suspicion; and we expect 
naturally to find a reference to the same implements that are named 
V. 20. LXX saw in the words the high price which the Philistines 

1 The combination of "1^2 with Jaj to cleave, hence as applied to a sword, to 
Jiack, j\Ii.9 I— a-1^ a hacked i.e. blunted szuord (Schultens, 0pp. Min., p. 168), 
is altogether questionable, the interchange of consonants being against rule ("ISQ 
should correspond to axi Arabic Jai, not Joi ; see the list of examples in Tenses, 
Appendix, § 178). 

XIIL 20— XIV. 4 105 

exacted for sharpening the tools of the Hebrews : to. Se dKiv-r] (= DTlK 
in V. 20) jiv Tpeis otlkXol €is Tov oSovra, i.e. \W2 ^'^?\^f n^7K'3. This 
reading will of course presuppose that the corrupt words D''S nT'VQn 
expressed originally the idea of sharpening: — 'And sharpening used 
to be obtained for the mattocks and for the coulters a/ three shekels 
a iooih,' etc. But DTli* and nitJ^nriD are not constructed with teeth : 
and the price stated appears to be incredibly high. 

: jli^ri (Bomberg, Ginsb. Kit.)] : I^n^n (Baer, with Qimhi, p. 99). 
The "^ is peculiar ; but in spite of the following 2 (not 3), dor-, not da-r^, 
is intended : GK. § 9^. On the form, GK. § 85"; Stade, § 52*; and 
comp. I^'ip qorbhdn Ez. 40, 43 (Baer, Gi. Kit.) ; \1^^ Est. 8, 6 {st. c). 

22, iTm] ^^"'1 would be expected (cf. on i, 12) ; and perhaps iTHl is 
an error for it, due to the preceding ^n^"n. 

n»n^D] the form is cstr. Probably ^i'DDD should follow ; so LXX. 

23. The garrison of the Philistines moved from Michmas itself 
(^1. 16) to the ' Pass of Michmas,' i.e. to the point on the north edge of 
W. es-Suw6nit, where the ' pass ' across (not dowTi) the Wady began 
(see the Map; and cf. on 14, 5). 

n^io] LXX iiTToo-Tatrts, attempting, no doubt, to render etymologically. 
However, vTroo-rao-is was used by Sophocles in the sense of iveSpa 
(Hatch, Assays in Biblical Greek, 1889, p. 88). 

14, I. DIM \Tl] See on i, 4. 

pn "i3yD] ''off — i.e. on; see the note on v. 4 — this side-across 
(or this opposite side).' \}\^ this recurs 17, 26; 20, 19 LXX; Jud. 
6, 20 ; 2 Ki. 4, 25; 23, 17; Zech. 2, 8; Dan. 8, i6t: cf. ^)^y^ Gen. 
24, 65; 37, i9t; ^1?l' Ez. 36, 35t. All are akin to the common 
Arabic (jjll who, which {Lex. 229^: Wright, Arab. Gramm. i, § 347 ; 
Compar. Gramm., p. 117). Everywhere else, however, the noun to 
■which pn is attached has the art. : hence (Bu.) we ought perhaps to 
read either t^n "inj;no (cf. 57. 4), or t^n nnpn nnyo ' across this /aw.' 

2. atJ'V] was abiding, — at the time. Notice the ptcp. 

nspa] 'at the outskirts (lit. extremity) of:' so 9, 27. Nu. 11, i. 20, 
1 6 al. It is a pity that the obscure archaism ' in the uttermost part 
of has been retained in RV. 

nynjn] Read yn: : see 13, 16 ; and cf. 14, 5. 

4. nnayon] the form is absolute (Jos, 2, 7), not (Sm.) construct. 

io6 The First Book of Samuel, 

01 naynro] nay = side, as v. 40. Ex. 32, 15 onnay •'Jk^o c« iheir 
two sides. |JD, as constantly, in defining position, lit. off, — in our idiom, 
from a diflferent point of view, on {Lex. 578^). nro , . , PTD the 
repetition has the effect of placing the two identical words in contrast 
with each other: hence they acquire the sense 'off here ... off 
there: So often, as 17, 3; 23, 26 HTO "inn ISr? . . . HTD nnn njfO. 
II 2, 13; Nu. 22, 24 nro mjl nto m:. 32, 19^; and similarly (in 
Ezek. only) ^^^^^ • ♦ . HQD (Ez. 40, 10 al.) ; and in analogous expressions 
(e.g. n? , . . nf = hie . . . i/le). Render, then, ' on the side, off here . . . , 
on the side, off there ' = ' on the one side . . . , on the other side.* 

5. LXX 6S0S can only be a corruption of 68ov<s (cf in v. 4 the 

second version koI 68ov? TreVpas ck tovtov) : hence the Gk. text here 

must have sustained a double corruption ; first, 68ov<; must have been 

changed (by accident or design) into 680s, and then the genders must 

have been altered designedly to agree with it. With J??', cf. the Fr. dent^ 

of a pointed rock, or mountain top (as in 'Les Dents du Midi,' 

opposite to Montreux). 

On the Pass of Michmas, see especially Dalman's articles, ZDPV. xxvii. (1904), 
161 ff., xxviii. 161 ff. (with several corrections of the first), containing minute 
descriptions of the position of Jeba' and Michmas, of the Pass, and other subordinate 
routes, between them, and of Wady es-Suwenit*. In these articles Dalman places 
Bozez and Seneh at d, c on the Map, where the sides of the Wady begin to be 
steep, but are not yet as precipitous as they become further down the valley. 
Now, however {Paldstina-Jahrbuch, 1911, p. 12), he places Bozez more than 
a mile further down the Wady, at el-Hosn et-tdhtdni (see the Map, Plate V at the 
end of ZDPV. xxviii), — i. e. the ' Lower fortress,' a block of hermits' caves with 
windows in the cliffs, — at the NW. end of a gully running into the Wady on 
the N. ; and Seneh at the peak Kurnet Challet el-Hayy, on the opposite side of 
the Wady, supposing the Philistine post to have been at cl-Mcrjameh, nearly 
a mile SE. of el-Miktara. At the mouth of W. Rahab — seemingly close by 
el-Hosn et-tahtani — there is (Rawnsley, PEFQS. 1879, 122 = PEF. Mefnoirs, 
iii. 142) 'a tooth of rock that, like a tower on a bracket, hangs in mid air at the 
angle of the rock cliff;' and Conder {PEFQS. 1881, 253; cf. T. W. 255 f.) 
supposes Jonathan to have climbed^up the rocks near here. Dalman now agrees 
with Rawnsley in making him climb up a gully a little further to the S., viz. W. 
Abu Ja'd {= Rawnsley's Sh'ab el-Huti, i.e. She'b el-Huti: ZDPV. xxviii. 167) : 
but d, c would seem to suit the terms of 13, 23. 14, 5 better than either of these 
suggested sites. See further the Addenda. 

^ Comp. the writer's Deuteronomy, p. xliii note. 

^ Properly ej'-3'Mw^z7('ofthe little acacias'), but pronounced now (Dalm. ZDPV. 
xxviii. 162, cf. 174) es-Swentt. For a fuller description of the Wady, see ibid, 161 ff. 


to Beitin 


a, b. Bozez and — ."^ 

Bozez and 

c, d. Bozez and k^ ■^M 

1904. (Dalman ncjv "^ V^ 

down Wady es-SuiT ^ 
p. 106.) 




\ r^ 



g, g, g- Presj ^N^\\|//y 





Michmas for passeri ^'^ v! O^ ^Vl 

e, f, e. Shorter 1 

f. Steep descent/^. 



' Wady of the City,|^ 

r. Ras el-Wad 



(Reproduced, by 
the end oi Z D M 
made in accordan 

\ — 

"lM\x\^ ^' 



XIV. 4~9 107 

pIVO] \\?i's, fixed firmly, or was a pillar (2, 8). But the word seems 
superfluous (contrast clause ^) ; and it is probably only a corrupt 
anticipation of psVD. 

71D] in front of , on the same side with: Jos. 8, 33 in front ^ the 
two mountains; Ex. 18, 19 in front ^ God, i.e. representing Him. 
See W. A. Wright, in ihe fournal of Philology, xiii. 1 17-120. 

6 resumes v. i, after the intervening parenthetical particulars. 

ncy] tWH is used here absolutely, in the full and pregnant sense 
which it sometimes has, esp. in poetry : i Ki. 8, 32 n''t;'J?1 and act, 
Jer. 14, 7 1»5J' |yrD^ nb^y, ^. 22, 32 HB'j; ^3, 37, 5 al. {Z.f;t:. 794* 4). Jud. 
2, 7, which has been compared, is quite different: TV^'}) there has an 
object, IB'N, referring back to ni.T n^yiO ^3. 

"li:fy»] Not as ixy 9, 1 7 ; but in the sense of constraint, difficulty : 
' There is no difficulty to Yahweh, in regard to saving (either) with 
many or with few.' Cf. for the thought 2 Ch. 14, 10. i Mace. 3, 18 
(cited by Th.). 

7- jP nuj] The reflexive "J7, as elsewhere (e.g. Dt. 1,7. 40), with 
verbs of motion. A difficulty in MT. arises however from the use of 
HDJ ; for in II 2, 21 ibi^D^ bv IS 1^0^ ^V 1^ nt:: it preserves its usual 
force of incline, which here seems not to be suitable. LXX express 
'b HDb '\y^ -iK'K b r\m do all unto which thine heart (i.e. mind) 
inclineth: cf. HDJ with "h Jud. 9, 3. i Ki. 11, 9. 

1j13?3] Cf. \\f. 20, 5 "[23^ 1^ fn\ But here also a phrase, which in 
this connexion is more idiomatic, is suggested by LXX iSou cyw /Ltcra o-oS, 
ws iq KapSi'a aoO icapSia fiou, i.e. ''3Zip ^33p3 (so Ew. Th. We. Bu. etc.). 

8. D''">3y IJms run] Notice the idiom, use of the ptcp., more delicate 
and expressive than the Engl, 'we will pass over.' Comp. similar 
sentences in Jud. 6, 37 (also followed by DS) ; Gen. 24, 13 and 43 
(followed by n^ni). 

9. IIOX^ n3 DN] The n3, pointing onwards, is idiomatic : see Gen. 
31, 8. II 15, 26. DDT and HDl? are synonyms, as Jos. 10, 13 Dl^l 

noy ni^i tj^c'n (cf 12b nil). 

^ynnn] idiomatically = in our place, where we are : as Jos. 6, 5 
n^nnn Tyn noin n^Ji will fall in its place; Jud. 7, 21 vnnn k'"'n noy^i 
and they stood each in his place ; Hab. 3, 16 TJ^N Tinni = and I 
tremble where I stand ; Is. 25, lo. Cf. Lex. 1065b 2 a. 

io8 The First Book of Samuel, 

10. DJOJ] will have %\\tn\}aexa.\ 20, 22; II 5, 24. 

11. ':i D'^nay nn] 'Behold Hebrews coining out,' etc. 0'"!??^^ 
(see Kitt.) the mice — a term of contempt (cf. Judith 14, 12 Vulg.) — 
was proposed by Hitzig {Gesch. Isr., p. 135), and is favoured by Bu. ; 
but it is not probable. 

12. nn^m] Read ^^sn, as elsewhere in chs. 13-14 : LXX Meo-o-a^. 

13. 1^S''l] LXX Ija'''! (cf. Jud. 20, 42). Against this, see We. 
nniJDD] intensive, as 17, 51. II i, 9. The Philistines fell down, 

smitten by Jonathan's sword ; and his armour-bearer, as he went 
along, despatched them after him. The ptcp. represents vividly the 
armour-bearer's activity on the occasion. 

14. 'y\ ""Vnas] 'as it were within half a furrow, (of) an acre of field.' 
niOV as Is. 5, 10 ^. If the text be correct, we must imagine the narrator 
to be thinking of a field, of a size such as the expression mc' 10^' 
would suggest : he says, then, that in a space equal to about half the 
distance across it, the twenty men were slain. mtJ> *7)0^ defines in 
effect the length of the HJyp, and is hence construed in 'apposition 
with it (on the principle explained in Tenses, § 192 : cf. HDN D^ti^y !]D0 
' a veil, twenty cubits '). Nevertheless the MT. excites suspicion, 
if only by the combination of 3 and 3 in ""^nas ^. LXX has cv (SoXlo-l ^ 
Kol Kox^aiiv Tov TreStow = mtiTl ? 21 CVrO. However, if the words 

^ The area which a IDif of oxen coald plough in (presumably) a day. 

* Which elsewhere occurs ow/y in the expression H^B'SIIID (five times), and in 
n^nnSD once (Is. 1,26), in parallelism with nJtJ'X"IIl3. ' |)p3 occurs (including 
10, 27) three times (the third passage is mn "'JD?D3 Lev. 26, 37). As an ordinary 
rule, such combinations are avoided in classical Hebrew (GK. § 118'""). Even 
by3 = ^s upon occurs only in the latest Hebrew, ^. 119, 14 ; 2 Ch. 32, 19 : and in 
a different sense, as a strengthened 2, Is. 59, 18 (first time ; the second occurrence 
must be corrupt) ; 63, 7f . 

^ Tisch.'s text adds kox Iv irerpoPoXoif. But on this We.'s acute note, written in 
1871, deserves to be transcribed. Comparing LXX with MT., he wrote: 'The 
first letter of MT. 3 is not expressed in LXX, the following five agree, but are 
combined to form one word (□''^112) : at the end of the verse LXX agrees also in 
mC It remains to refer, if possible, lOif Hjy and Kal iv irerpo^oKois koX kv 
Kox^a^t to a common source. When the six letters on the one side and the six 
words on the other are compared, and when further the meanings of the two 
principal words in the Greek are taken into account, it is natural to suppose 
If TrerpopoXois (= y?p ""JIX Job 41, 20) to be a gloss explanatory of kox^c^^v 
pebbles (i Mace 10, 73), which appear here strangely as a weapon.' We.'s 

XIV. io-i6 109 

contain some notice of the weapons used, they are certainly out of 
place at the end of v. 14, and (We.) will be a gloss on v. 13, intended 
to explain, in view of 13, 22, what weapons the armour-bearer could 
have had ; under the circumstances, also, pebbles, at any rate, do not 
appear likely to have been employed. On mySD, the furrow (cf. 
;/f. 129, 3), at the end of which the ploughman turns, see Dalman, 
ZDPV. 1905, p. 27 ff. Dalm. regards mB' I'O'i as an explanatory 
gloss. 11^* still means z. furrow in Palestine : the average length of 
one seems to be (p. 31) 20-30 yds., so that half a furrow would be 
10-15 yds. 

15. 'y\ runOj] ' in the camp, and (so LXX) on the field, and among 
all the people,' i.e. in the camp (13, 17), among the men posted in 
the fields around, and among the people generally : even the garrison 
(13, 23) and the ravaging band (13, 17) trembled as well. 

^J1 S"ini] 'and it [GK. § 144^] became a trembling of God,' i.e. the 
affair resulted in a general panic. D^n7X rmn denotes a terror without 
adequate apparent cause, and therefore attributed to the direct in- 
fluence of God. Comp. the later Greek use of iraviKov (from Ilav : 
see Liddell and Scott, s. z/.). Cf. 11, 7 nVT nna, Gen. 35, 5 DNI^X nrin : 
also 2 Ki. 7, 6 ; Ez. 38, 21 LXX (nn-jn-^ab for 3nn ^^r\ ^53^). Whether 
TJ~l is hyperbolical, or denotes an actual earthquake, is uncertain : 
B*j;"i is the word regularly used to express the latter idea. 

ninn] from nnnn ; the dagesh is abnormal (GK. § 952). 

16. 71X^7 D'lQVn] GK. § 129^. Saul's watchmen, or scouts, would 
follow what was taking place on the other side of the valley. 

nynn] Read ^333: see 13, 16, and cf. 14, 2. 5. 

ci'ni ■ji^'^l JIDJ pcnn mm] Q^ni is untranslateable. AV. ' and they 
went on beating down ' connects the word with ^"^ to hammer (so 
Targ.) : but besides the word being unsuitable, and one never used 
in such a connexion, the construction is an impossible one (the inf. 
abs. would be required : D-'H'! '^^n 'V^^\ LXX has kcA l8ov rj TrapefjL/SoXr] 
Terapayfievr] evOev koL evOev, i.e. D^i]! D-T] ^l'^^ rUHDn njm, which 
yields a thoroughly satisfactory sense. ']7''1 is a corruption of D7n : 

reasoning was sound : kv TreTpo^oXoii, as is now known (see Nestle's collation of 
Tisch.'s text with A, B, S, published in 1879, °^ Svvete's edition), forms no part 
of the text of either A or B. 

no The First Book of Samuel, 

and the meaning is that the camp melted away, i.e. was disorganized, 
and dispersed in alarm ', hither and thither, i, e. in every direction. 

17. i:i3yo] Cf. II I, 2. Gen. 26, 16 {Lex. 87a, 768'^). 

18. D\n^N P"iN rw^in'] We must certainly read, with LXX, TViTin 
niSSn; cf. v. 3, and especially 23, 9 TiDNH nK'''3n. 30, 7 "h V^l'TWV^ 
*11SNn (so also Dr. Weir; and now Bu. Sm. etc.). The ephod, not the 
ark, was the organ of divination ; and, as the passages cited shew, 
B>''jn is the word properly applied to bringing the ephod into use. 

b^'\^^ ''J31 DM^NH |11N rvr\ ""a] ^X-ik'"' "«J21 is here untrans- 

lateable, 1 never having the force of a preposition such as Dy, so as 
to be capable of forming the predicate to DM. Read, after LXX, 

bam^'' v.??' *<i!^^ I3i*n niDsn nk'j iTh a^^n ••a. 

19. ""Il ''y] 1?"^ "^y would be in accordance with Ex. 33, 22. Jud. 
3, 26. Job 7, 19. Jon. 4, 2 (Z^j;. 724t>b). "1?"^ ^y (Sta. Bu.) is not 
possible : with ly we should require either (disregarding the disj. 
accent on '•'"T'l) *1?M Ty ijlXt^ '•n^l (cf. 18, 9), or, more idiomatically 
(without ^n-'i), nano ^an'y (or nano my ijiNB'i): Z^a:. 729a. 

^b''')] "1, the subject having preceded, as 17, 24. Gen. 30, 30. Ex. 
9, 21 al. {Tenses, § 127 a; GK. § iiih). But Klo.'s ^^n is attractive. 

311 "lli?n l^^l] Exactly so Gen. 26, 13 ; Jud. 4, 24 ; II 5, 10 (= i Ch. 
11,9); 18, 25.t Cf. GK. § 1 1 3". But the adjectives are peculiar ; and 
analogy (6, 12^) would strongly support an inf. abs. in each case. 

20. inyin ti'^N ain] viz. in consequence of the panic : cf. Jud. 7, 22. 
Ez. 38, 2 it" (especially with the reading noticed above, on v. 15). 

21. nvn? T\'a?i DJI n'^no] On this passage, see Tenses, § 206 Obs. 
n1^^? is in itself defensible grammatically (' Now the Hebrews had been 

1 Unless, indeed, as We. suggests, 31D3 has here the sense of ^Lo in Arabic 
(Lane, 2743 ; Ex. 15, 15 Saad. ; Qor. 18, 99 and we shall leave them on that day 

°' . ' ' ■• ° ' '° ' r ^ ■ 11 1 

jjfljtj -.9 fry*^ *4-''"-'. part 01 them 5wr^'7«^upon the other : 10, 23 ; 24,40 al. 
_^.* waves), viz. swaying or surging as the waves of the sea. So Bu. Sm. Now. ; 
cf. MooxG., Judges, p. 141 ; and it is true, to shake (lit.) or be agitated, perturbed, 
would suit nearly all the occurrences of J1D , and is often the sense expressed by LXX. 
^ avTos LXX. In the causal sentence, the subject of the verb is slightly 
emphatic ; and hence the explicit pron. is suitable, if not desiderated: see 9, 13 ; 
Gen. 3, 20 ; Jos. 17, i ; 24, 27 ; Jud. 14, 3 she (and not another) ; Jer. 5, 5 ; 34, 7 ; 
xp. 24, 2; 25, 15; 33, 9; 91, 3; 103, 14; 148, 5; Job 5, 18; II, 11; 28, 24; 
Hos. 6, I ; 11,10; 13, I5al. 


to the Philistines as aforetime, in that they went up with them to the 
camp round about ; but they also ivere for being', etc., i. e. they 
accompanied the Phihstines into the camp, but afterwards prepared 
to desert), though this would be the one passage in which the inf. 
with 7 would be used of past time in early Hebrew ; and the verse 
appears to describe ?i fact, rather than an intention (nvn^). LXX, 
Vulg. for ncn D31 3''3D have iirea-Tpdcfirja-av kol avToi, reversi sunt ut 
essent, i.e. (Th. We. etc.) HCn D: 133D ; and, for horiM, ex^e's, heri, 
i.e. (as Bu. points out; cf. lo, ii) Pionxoi; 'Now the Hebrews, who 
had belonged to the Philistines (viz. as subjects) aforetime, they also 
turned to be with Israel,' a reading now generally accepted. If, 
however, it be adopted, it is almost necessary to suppose that "iti'X has 
fallen out after Dnayni (so Bu. Sm. Now. Ehrl.) : the omission in prose 
of the relative (except indeed by the Chronicler", whose style is peculiar 
to himself) is exceedingly rare ; and the few passages in which it is 
omitted ^ read so strangely that it is questionable if the omission is not 
due to textual error (Gen. 39, 4 •b'^''~h^, contrast vv. 5. 8; Ex. 9, 4 
hir\^^ ^n^-i'DO; 13, 8; 18, 20; [4, 13 is different;] Jer. 52, 12 
(rd. "^^V^, or, as 2 Ki. 25, 8, '2 li?D 13^): Ew. § 333b; GK. § i55<i^). 
'ai "i^J'X bir\^'' Dy] The restriction makes it probable that Bu. is 
right in supposing that tJ'iN has fallen out before i'NiB'V 

22. Ipsnn] in Hif.: GK. § 531. On the syntax of p''3iri to press 
dose upon, see on 31, 2. For nns \>'^y^n Ehrl, would read ^^nx p^ij 
(as 17, 53) =go hotly after. This is plausible here and Jud. 20, 45, 
but difficult in i Ch. 10, 2 : when we find twice ''nriN Ipm^ for 
riN IpaT^I, is it likely that ipanM would be twice an error for ip^T"! .^ 

23. pN-n^n-riN may] passed over B., — nay with nx, as Dt. 2, 18. 
Jud. II, 29: some MSS., however, have ^y. Beth-aven was a little 
E. of Bethel (13, 5), 4 miles NW. of Michmas, and 1000 ft. above it. 

Luc. reads prrrT^a. The natural route from Michmas to Aijalon (v. 31) 

^ ^IDJIND (19, 7) is rendered iael «x^") j-/«<^ heri. 

2 See LOT.\ p. 537, No. 30; and add 2 Ch. 1,4. 

2 Conjunctional phrases such as TNO, bv = IB^X'^y, Qi''3 II 22, i being 
excepted. The relative is also omitted regularly after ^mn nHX i Ki. 13,12. 
2 Ki. 3,8. 2 Ch. 18, 23. Job 38, 19. 24t. And comp. below, on ch, 25, 15 (iJO^). 

* Comp. also Jud. 8, i. 20, 15". ch. 6,9. 26, 14. 

112 The First Book of Samuel, 

appears to be first up to Bethel (4 miles), then SW. to Bireh (2 miles) ; after this, 
to judge from the map, either due W., by a bridle-path across the mountains 
(8 miles), straight to Lower Beth-horon (1310 ft.), — or, by a better road, first 
4 miles SSW. to el-Jib (Gibeon), then 5 miles WNW. to Upper Beth-horon 
(2020 ft.), 2 miles to Lower Beth-horon (1310 ft.), — and lastly 6 miles down the 
valley to the SW. to Aijalon (940 ft.). As both Beth-aven and Beth-horon would 
thus be passed on the way to Aijalon, either reading would suit. 

24. Ninn DVl trjJ bvr\\i^'> K'''N1] B'JJ will mean had been driven, hard- 
pressed hy ih& enemy (as 13, 6): but it is not apparent how this con- 
dition would be relieved by Saul's measure '31 7x11. (The rendering of 
AV. 'had adjured,' is contrary to Hebrew grammar.) LXX has here 
a variant, which, at least to Ephraim, seems original, and suits the con- 
text. For the words quoted it reads : koI ttSs 6 Xaos rjv ixera SaouX ws SeVa 

^iXtaSes dvSpaJv' kol rjv 6 ttoAc/xos hieairap^ivos els oXr]v ttoXlv iv rw opet 
Tw E^pat/x,. Kat ^aovX rj-yvorjaev o.yvoiav [xeydXrjv iv rfj rj/xepa iKeivrj, 
Kal dpSrat ktX., i.e. (as We. rightly restores) b^iif ^V '"1^0 °VC"^?1 
nbna njj^ n^f b^af] JQ^p^s^ "^i}^ rii'isj nDnJjjan inrii \:}'ii cq^n nnb'y? 
Ninn Di*3. Eis oXrjv ttoXiv is doubtless a doublet of iv tu> opet : for *in 
confused with T'y see Jos. 15, 10 S' 2 Ki. 23, 16; 2 Ch. 21, 11 ; Is. 
66, 20 (Trommius) : oXrjv is merely amplificatory. rii'iSJ is applied 
to a battle in II 18, 8 : n3t:> is found in ch. 26, 21 (LXX r)yv6r]Ka). 

' Committed a great error,' however, agrees poorly with the context : in the 
sequel Saul is in no way condemned, and Yahweh is displeased {v. 37) at the curse 
being unheeded. Klo. conjectured, very cleverly, that r/yvorjaev dyvoiav was an 
error for ijyviafv dyveiav, which (Bu.) would express "113 T'-in ^ (cf. Nu. 6, 2 
d<payviaa(r6ai dyveiav = '\''V}b "l'']3 [? "1.1?. ''"'!l'P]> 3 dyviaeriaeTat = "IT) separated 
a great (ceremonial) separation, i. e. imposed a great abstinence, "ip , and (Nu. 6, 2. 
3. 5. 6. 12) T'ln, are chiefly (Nu. 6) used of the vow of separation, or abstinence, 
made by the T'P (the ' Nazirite'), but at least the Nif. "1^3 is used more generally 
(Lev. 22,2. Ez. 14, 7. Zech. 7, 3 ; Hos. 9, lof) ; and with this reading the meaning 
will be that Saul, perceiving by Israel's success that Yahweh was with it, laid 
upon the people, in accordance with the religious ideas of the time, a ' taboo' of. 
abstinence, hoping thereby to secure His continued assistance. The conjecture 
is clever, but rests (Now.) upon a precarious basis : "lip "I^IH , also, though it 
might perhaps have borne the meaning supposed, does not actually occur with it. 

1 Though here LXX may have paraphrased, treating Dny IH as = D''"^y'' JTilp. 

2 -inj) "n3 (Sm. Kenn.) is less probable : this expression is followed, not by 
a curse, but by a promise dependent on a condition : ch. i, 11. II 15, 8. Gen. 28, 20. 
Nu. 21, 2. Jud. II, 20. 

XIV. 24-26 113 

ij?*!] Hif. of ni?N (for bxil) made io swear : GK. § 76^; more fully 
Konig, i. 578 f. 

*riOp31] in continuation of aij;n ly: Tenses, § 115, GEL § 112^; 
similarly Jud. 6, 18 ; Is. 5, 8. 

25. 1x3] Comp. II 15, 23 D'-an psn bai; Gen. 41, 57. 

25-2 6a. 26a merely repeats 25*, though the verses stand too 
closely together for a resumption to be probable. LXX has koX 
laaA opv/Aos y]v /xeXtcro-covos Kara Trpoa-oiirov tov dypov' koi ela-rjXdev 6 Xaos 
€ts TOV ix^Xicra-^va, koi l8ov eiropeveTo XaXwv. We.'s restoration is 
remarkably clever : ' 'laaX and Spvfios are doublets, each corresponding 
to the Heb. ny\ To the same word, however, corresponds in v. 26 
lxi.Xi(T(Toiv, so that we have here in fact a triplet. Through v. 26, 
K(u rjv fj.eXL(T(TU)v (or Koi yu.eAto-(Ta)v rjv) is confirmed as the genuine 
rendering of LXX, 'laaX was added to fx^Xia-cr^v, and was afterwards 
explained by Spvfj.6s, p-eXicra-wv being in consequence changed into 
the genitive, in order to produce a sentence out of the words koL 
'laaA. 8pv[x6^ fieXia-a-wv. The text of LXX, as thus restored, would 
read in Hebrew r\im ''p.S b -TH 1 ny:]. In v. 26a, LXX agree with 
MT., except in expressing 131 for K'31. The connexion leads us 
in -ai to recognize dees, and (observing the 1 in fNl) to read njni 
nm ibn, vocalizing Vnan I3|?n, or more probably il^"! ll^n [its bees 
had left it ^]. From the text thus presupposed by LXX, MT. arose 
as follows, ly, which was ambiguous, was first of all explained by 
cai V. 25; afterwards, however, it was forgotten that \y21 was only 
intended to explain 'ly, and ny, rendered superfluous by the explana- 
tory ^21, and understood in its common sense as wood, was detached 
from its original connexion, and united with the fragments of the 
variant of 24 end, preserved in LXX [kui irao-a rj yrj rjpia-ra = by\ 
nrb Dyo Y-\^t\]. In view of the beginning oiv. 26, the sentence was 
thus formed which stands now in MT. as v. 25a. b>2t for naT v. 26 
is no doubt an accidental corruption, though the fact that "im as 
a collective term ^ does not occur elsewhere in the OT., might con- 

^ ny* = honeycomb, as Ct. 5, i ""Cm Oy ''"iy\ 

^ The sense stream postulated by MT. for T]^n is unsupported by analogy. 
* Oni":! in the ^luf-al {J)ees) occurs Dt. 1,44 al. 
1363 I 

114 The First Book of Samuel, 

tribute to the mistranscription.' Read, therefore, for vv. 25-26^ : ' And 
there was honeycomb upon the face of the field, and the people came 
to the honeycomb, and lo, the bees had left it : but no man,' etc. 

I'D ^N IT" yC'O pNl] 'S'^r\ is to overtake, reach, obtain ; with T" as 
subject, it occurs often in the Priests' Code (e.g. Lev. 14, 21) to 
express the idea of the means of a person sufficing to meet some 
expense. Here Klo. is undoubtedly right in restoring 3"'C'D: yUT\ 
ns ?J< T' is the usual Heb. phrase for the sense required: see &. 27 
and Pr. 19, 24. Dr. Weir makes the same suggestion, remarking 
' LXX eTTicTTpec^wv as in the next verse : ' so also Targ. ITlC. Hitzig 
(on Am. 9, 10) proposed ^^''310. 

27. nnlx] Read fyr\S^ (on II 21,1): noo and r\'ip are both masc. (Ehrl.). 
nJN"ini] Kt. njNiril and his eyes saw: Qre n3")kril and his eyes 

hrighteiied (as v. 29), i.e. he was refreshed, revived; a metaphor from 
the eyes brightening after fatigue or faintness : cf. i/^. 13, 4; 19, 9 
D''3''y nT'ND (i. e. reviving spiritually). The Qre is here the more 
forcible reading, and preferable to the Ktib. 

28. ^y'l] so V. 31, Jud. 4, 21. 2 S. 21, 13, as if from ^IV. But the 
verb is ^y^ • so no doubt the regular form ^y?l should be restored 
(GK. § 72*). Dyn ^y'l, however, here interrupts the connexion, and 
anticipates unduly v. 3it>: either it is a gloss, intended to justify 
Jonathan's words in v. 30, or we should, perhaps, read Dy^ "ly'l and 
he straitly charged the people (cf. Ex. 19, 21. 23 ; and see on 8, 9). 

29. "i3y] An ominous word in OT., used of the trouble brought 
by Achan upon Israel (Jos. 7, 25 T^^T^ DV2 nin"" l-isy IJmay n»), and 
by the daughter of Jephthah upon her father (Jud. 11, 25 n''^^ nxi 
'"I3y3), and retorted by Elijah upon Ahab (i Ki. 18, 17 f.). ' Troubled ' 
is not strong enough : the root signifies to make turbid, fig. for, destroy 
the happiness of, bring disaster on, undo. Cf. Gen. 34, 30. 

nrn ^21 Oyo] nrn does not belong to ^11 (as accents) — for it 
could not in that case have the art. — but to the definite ^21 DyD ' this 
little honey : ' cf. 15,14 nm fN^irr^p (' this bleating of the sheep ' — 
}NV is construed as 2i plur., II 24, 17); Dt. 29,20 nrn minn 1QD this 
book of the law ; 2 Ki. 6, 32 ntn nviJDn"p this son of a murderer. 

30. ""i fix] P|K = indeed . . . / with reference to a preceding 
sentence, a fortiori, the more then . . .1 (e.g. Job 4, 19). In ''3 r\ii, 

XIV. 26-34 115 

^3 merely strengthens 5]^, 'tis indeed that . . . / Here "i^ ^IN is prefixed 
(unusually) to the protasis of a hypothetical sentence : ' The more, 

then, if the people had eaten, [would they have been refreshed 

Hkewisej : for now (nny = as things are, as Job i6, 7) the slaughter 
(read nstsn) hath not been great among the Philistines.' In LXX 
clause b, however, agrees with the usual type of sentences introduced 
by nny '•3 (Gen. 31, 42. 43, 10: Tenses, § 141), N^ being omitted, 
as due to a misunderstanding, as if nny ^3 = 'for now-/ the sentence 
will then read : ' The more, then, if the people had eaten . . . , would 
indeed in that case (nny = as things might have been, as usually in 
this connexion) the slaughter have been great.' 

31. nJ7^x] Ayyalon (Aijalon), now Fdlo (940 ft.), was 6 miles SW. 
of Lower Beth-horon {v. 23), down the Vale {\>^v) of Aijalon ; so the 
route would be substantially the same as that by which Joshua drove 
the Canaanites (Jos. 10) ; see Stanley, S. and P. 207 ff. ; H. G. 210 f. 
The entire distance from Michmas to Aijalon would be 20-23 rniles 
(see on v. 23). 

< < 

32. cyi] Qre £3y^1, which (or rather tDy*1: see on 15, 19) is evi- 
dently correct. 

Din 7y Dyn PDN'^i] A practice, as the present passage shews, 
regarded with strong disfavour by the Hebrews: forbidden in the 
'Law of Holiness' (Lev. 17-26), Lev. 19, 26 Din bv 1^3Nn X^\ and 
censured by Ezekiel (33, 25). ^y in this connexion is idiomatic, 
and has the force of together with: so Ex. 12, 8 inijJN'' nmo bv, 
Nu. 9, II in!?DN^ on-iroi m^'io ^y. 

33. omn] seems to be here 'neither the right verb, nor in the right 
person ' (Bu.). Sm., very plausibly, D''T?'?i'; so Bu. Ehrl. 

CNtpn] are sinning, — much more expressive than EVV. ' sin.' The 
form is for Ci'^^H, the weak letter N quiescing : GK. §§ 23c, 7500. 

?3N7] ifi respect of eati?ig, Anglice, ' in eating.' So above, b\\i\ih 
12, 17. 19, and frequently. For DVn LXX has D^n : probably rightly. 

34- ^^.1?'] GK. § 96. Here only: Dt. 22, i Wf. From an orig. 
say or si' ay : cf. the Arab. pi. (from shdt^^), shayh^^, shiyd"^^'^ etc. 

mn PX] a clear example of ^N with the force of ^y. 

IT'a niK' t^'"'N] Some, however, it is natural to suppose, would only 

1 Cf. Gen. 9, 4. Lev. 7, 26. 17, 10. Dt. 12, 16. 23. 
I 2 

ii6 The First Book of Samuel, 

have a nb' to bring, in accordance wiih the option permitted by the 
terms of the invitation : read accordingly with LXX IT'^ "^^^^ K'''N 
each thai which was in his hand, which is altogether preferable. For 
ITS of. Gen. 32, 14 ; 43, 26 nT3 nt^'N nmon. 

n7''7n] = ' that night,' — a questionable usage : nPvn adverbially 
is elsewhere always either by 7iighl, or to-nighl, or once (15, 16) last 
night. LXX omits. KIo. Bu. Sm. would read nin''^ (cf. Am. 5, 25). 

35. The stone was made into an extemporized altar, and the 
slain animals being consecrated by presentation at it, their flesh 
could be eaten. See W. R. Smith, OTJC? p. 250. Clause b implies 
that Saul built subsequently other altars to Yahweh. 

. , . irin ins] For the position of ins, cf. on 15, i : comp. also 
that of dn? Jud. 10, 4. Hos. 13, 2. Job 15, 20; ""p II 23, 3; 1^ 
Dt. 21, 17; D3 Jer. 31, 8. 

36. mn:] from Beth-horon (cf v. 23), or some other place in the 
hill-country, following the Philistines down the Vale of Aijalon. 

npJ]] for njb31 GK. § 67<id, The 1 is partitive {Lex. 88^), ' plunder 
among them,"' like ' smite among' (v. 31 al.), 'l pax, etc. 

IKB'J Nbl] The jussive is unusual, both in the ist pers. {Tenses, 
§ 46 n.; GK. § 48g«.), and after ah (cf Gen. 24, 8 ; II 17, 12 ; 18, 14 : 
Tenses, § 50 a Obs. ; GK. § 109^). Read prob. iXf 3. 

37. D^nnn , . . "riNn] The repeated question, as in the similar 
inquiries, 23, ii ; 30, 8; 11 5, 19. 

38. IB'a] i. e. goshu : so also, anomalously, put of pause, Jos. 3, 9. 
2 Ch. 29, 31 1 (cf. "'E'J Ru. 2, i4t), for the normal ^K'a Gen. 45, 4 al. : 
GK. § 651. 

niiS] comers, hence metaph. of princes, the stay and support of 
their people: so Jud. 20, 2. Is. 19, 13, where Gesenius compares 
^j corner-stone or corjier-pillar (e.g. Eph. 2, 20), used Qor. 51, 39 
of Pharaoh's nobles, and the pr. n. Rokn-eddin, ' Pillar of religion.' 

nC3] wherein, — as Mai. i, 6 'wheretn have we despised Thy name ?' 
Vulg. expresses '<1D2, which is preferred by Th. We. Bu. etc., and is 
certainly more pointed. V. 39 shews that Saul has a person in his 
mind. In the old character *• might easily be corrupted to n . 

39. ''2^.^] thrice besides, but a form contrary to analogy : Stade 
(§ 370^)) and GK. (§ 1 000 note^ would read ^S'f.";. As nXDn is fern., 

XIV. }4~4^ ^^7 

we ought, however, to have ^"^l (or i^?^."'.) : cf. LXX aTroKpLOr} = ruy 
(with n). Why, in these and some other forms, as ''15'"^', ''t'T^j the 
verdal sufhx should be used, is uncertain: cf. GK. § ioop, 

"•D , . . DX "'D] The first '•a introduces the terms of the oath : the 
second ""^ is merely resumptive of the first, after the intervening 
hypothetical clause. So often, as II 3, 9. Gen. 22, 16 f. [Lex. 472*). 

41. D''nn r\2n] AV. 'Give a perfect (lot):' RV. 'Shew the right:' 
Keil, ' Give innocence ' (of disposition, i. e. truth). All these suggested 
renderings of D^cn are without support. D'*cn is ' perfect,' i. e, in 
a physical sense, of an animal, unblemished ; in a moral sense, inno- 
cent ^, blameless. D^ion T\1T\ might mean * give one who is perfect : ' 
but this is not the sense which is here required : Saul does not ask 
for one who is perfect to be produced ; and though he might ask for 
the one who is in the right to be declared, this would be expressed by 
pn^" (Dt. 25, I ; I Ki. 8, 32), not by D'^Dn. LXX has for the two 

words : Tt on ovk dTre/cpt'^rys tw SovAo) (tov crrj/jiepov ; 17 iv i/xol rj iv 
'IwvaOav TO) vi<x> /xoi; rj dSt/ci'a ; Kvptc 6 0eos IcrparjX, 80s St^Aovs' kol iav 
rdSe eiTrg, 80s Sr) tw Xaw (tov 'lapayjX, 80s Srj ocnoTrjTa, whence the 
following text may be restored : iN ^^-^l DK ni*n ^"nnrnwS mv N'^ n^b 

; D''l3ri nan . The text thus obtained is both satisfactory in itself, and 
at once removes the obscurity and abruptness attaching to MT. The 
first clause corresponds with LXX exactly: in the second clause 
eav Ta8€ eLirr] 80s 8^ cannot be followed ; but 80s Srj (omitted in A) 
seems to be merely a rhetorical anticipation of the 80s 8^ following ; 
and considering that LXX render ):^'< in v. 39 by a verb {airoKpiOrj), 
there is nothing arbitrary in supposing that rdSe cittt; may represent 
13Ci» here. For ^'^':. DK cf. 20, 8. A^Aoi stands for DH^if^ ch. 28, 6 
and Nu. 27, 21 (as Si^Awcrts, in Ex. 28, 26. Lev. 8, 8). The cause of 
the omission in MT. lies evidently in the occurrence of the same 
word hvr\^'' before both ^ no^ and D"'Dn r\2T\. The restored text 
(which is now generally accepted by scholars) shews (what has often 
been surmised independently) that the conm DHINn DDSTD was a 
mode of casting lots: cf. i^''Sn v. 42, and note that I???!, which 

' Innocent, that is, not of a particalar offence, but generally. 

ii8 The First Book of Samuel, 

immediately follows xrvv. 41 (but which in MT. stands unexplained), 
is the word regularly used of taking by lot, 10, 20 f. Jos. 7, 14. 16. 

42. After ^11 LXX has an addition, which in Heb. would be 

m in^V P31 ^Tl 1^''a^1 Dynn. But although its omission could be 
readily explained by homoeoteleuton, its originality is very doubtful : 
see We. and Now. 

43. TioyD ny^] ' I did taste : ' GK. § 113". 

m?OK ''3Jn] ' Here I am ; I will die,' — Jonathan thus not complaining 
of the fate to which he has involuntarily rendered himself liable, but 
declaring his willingness to meet it. For ""jan as an expression of 
resignation, cf. 12, 3, and esp. II 15, 26; also Gen. 44, 16. 50, 18. 
EW., in ' And lo, I must die,' neglect the suff. in '•JiH. 

44. nt^y na] LXX adds "h, which at least is a correct explanation 
of the phrase; the curse being invoked naturally upon himself. 
Possibly, however, this was understood; at least, the phrase recurs 
I Ki. 19, 2 without 'h (where LXX similarly /^ot). The oath followed 
by ^3, as II 3, 9. 35. I Ki. 2, 23. 19, 2. 

45. nyitJ'''] The passage illustrates the material sense of the word : 
so Ex. 14, 13; II 10, ir ; and nyi:j*n ^ (the more common word in 
prose), as Jud. 15, 18; ch. 11, 9. 13. 19, 5 al. The root yB''>, as 
Arabic shews, means properly to be wide, capacious, ample (e. g. 
Qor. 29, 56 A.i-.lj (St?;' u' behold. My earth is broad ; Matt. 7, 13 
(Lagarde) ^-^IJ = TrAareta ; 2 Cor. 6, 1 1 (Erpenius) il^V^ = TreirXa- 
Tvvrai; Gen. 26, 22; Ex.34, 24 Saad. illj = n'^mn) : hence ytinn 
is properly to give width and freedom to (opp. ">^i!l), and ny"iCJ>' is 
* safety ' in the sense of space to move in, freedom from enemies or 
constraint (opp. ">S 7iarrowness, angustiae). Etymologically, then, the 
idea of the root would be best expressed by deliver, deliverance ; and 
in a passage such as 11, 9 nyiKTI Daij n\nn "iriD this sense appears to 
be clearly distinguishable. By the Prophets and Psalmists, however, 

1 Formed as though from a root yilB' on the ground, probably, of a false 
analogy. Similarly nSlpH, niSK'n, HSnn as though from [fj^ip, XIC*, f)^"!], 
though the verbs actually in use are fjp3 nXB' ND"l. Comp. 01. p. 401 ; 
Stade, § 266^ 

XIV. 4^-45 119 

the idea of deliverance or freedom which nyiK''' , T\'T>^r\ connote, is 
enlarged, so as to include spiritual as well as material blessings. 
These words seldom, if ever, express a spiritual state exclusively: 
their common theological sense in Hebrew is that of a material 
deliverajice attetided by spiritual blessings (e.g. Is. 12, 2 ; 45, 17). In 
some passages, the temporal element in the deliverance is very 
evident, e.g. i/f. 3, 9 (RV. marg. 'Or, Victory:' see v. 8); 20, 6 
(cf 7); 28, 8 (note Ty and nyo) ; 62,3 (note the parallel figures 
niV, ••3Jt^'J^); 74, 12, etc. : cf. nyiCTl, i/'. 33, i7- 60, n. The margins 
in RV. on several of the passages quoted (including those in the 
historical books) serve as a clue to the manner in which the Hebrew 
words represented by the English ' salvation ' acquired gradually 
a higher and fuller meaning. 

1tJ'N"1 myD'O ^D^ DN] ' If there shall fall even a single hair of his 
head to the ground!' mw is a single hair, see Jud. 20, 16 nr PJD 
N'Dn'' xh myK'iTi^K pxa yhp : the fem. being the so-called ' nomen 
unitatis,' Ew. § 176a ; GK. § i22t. So ^J« a pel, n*3X a ship (Jon, 
1,3). \0 is to be understood here as in TD^ ^^^'^ Dt. 15, 7: lit. 
' starting from one of thy brethren * ' = even one of thy brethren. 
This use of p is elucidated by Arabic: see Ges. Thes., or Lex. 581" 
(where illustrations are cited); Ew. § 278"^; GK. § 119^ [note): also 
Ewald, Gr. Arab. §577; Wright, Arab. Gr. ii. § 48 f <5. Comp. 
Qor. 6, 59 14JL«J ^^ P;7 J;-? Jaili UJ even a single lea/ {nom. unit.) 
fallelh not without His knowing it. — The proverbial expression itself 
recurs II 14, 11, and with nb for DJ< i Ki. i, 52. 

ny] = in conjunction with, aided by (uncommon) : cf. Dan. 11, 39. 

nS)'''!] redeemed: literally, by the substitution of another (Ew. Hist. 
iii. 51 [E. T. 36]; We.), or metaphorically? Had the former been 
the sense intended, the fact, it is probable, would have been stated 
more circumstantially, instead of its being left to the reader to infer it 
from a single word, ma is the technical word used of the redemption 
of a life that is forfeit ; but the redemption may be made by the life of 
an animal, or by a money payment, Ex. 13, 13. 15. 34, 20, cf. 21, 8. 30 
(all JE); Nu. 18, 15. i6(P). 

^ Or, according to others, a rhetorical application oi the parfiitve sense. 

I20 The First Book of Samuel, 

47- ■'3^031] LXX 1^031, probably rightly: see II 8, 3-12. 

yt^l''] yc'TH is to pronounce or treat as wicked, i. e. to co7idemn 
(Dt, 25, i); hence MT. has been supposed to mean condemned in 
fact (Keil), punished ; and in support of this rendering, the analogy 
of the Syr. oil. prop, to treat as guilty, to condemn, but occasionally 
used in the sense of r^rrav to put to the worse, overcome (Ephr, i. 325; 
ii. 318; ap. PS. col. 1 21 3), has been appealed to. But such a usage 
would be quite isolated in Hebrew : and the absence of a suffix or 
other object to ytri'' is strongly against it here. LXX has co-c^cto = 
WT. : — ' And wherever he turned he was victorious,' a reading in every 
way satisfactory and suited to the context. For the sense of the Nif. 
cf. Pr. 28, T 8 W^;. D^tpn Tjbin ; Zech. 9, 9 VC'iJ^ pn^ lit. just and saved, 
i. e. successful and victorious. The impff. denote reiteration or habit 
in the past, just as in Pr. 17, 8 etc. they denote it in present time. 
LXX ov av io-rpdcfiT] ecrw^cTO : on ox; av comp. \'J, '^\ footnote. 

48. PTI t^'y'l] lit. made might, i.e. achieved prowess, performed 
deeds of valour: Nu. 24, 18. \\/. 60, 14. 118, 15. 16. 

inDlJ'] The ptcp. seems intended as a plural : if so, the word affords 
an example of the very rare form of the suffix 3 masc. in -^ after a 
plural noun: 30, 26 inn, Nah. 2,4 inni33, Hab. 3, 10 in^T, Job 
24, 23 in^?;y, Pr. 29, 18 in-i.fJ<: Stade, p. 20 note, § 346* (2), and 
p. 355; Ew. § 258a; GK. § 91I ; Wright, Compar. Gramm. p. 158. 

49. '•It:'^] in all probability a corruption of Vf K, or iHWi, ' man of 
Yahweh,' an intentional alteration of i'ynB'X i Ch. 8, 33, the real 
name of ' Ishbosheth,' altered, as We. says, when the title ' Baal ' fell 
into disrepute (see on II 4, 4), ' theils in Vf N von Verniinftigen, theils 
in r)JJ*3"Ji'''N von Unverniinftigen.' 

LXX 'Uaaiov\ (Luc. 'Uaaiov) presupposes a reading ^rT'K'N or i''K'N. Not 
only are a great many pr. names beginning, as pointed by the Massorites, with -"• 
represented in LXX by 'l6- (as 'lepe/^ms for irT'O'l^ , 'Uaaai for ''^> , 'lefOaf for 
nri2^, etc.), but several pr. names beginning with K are so represented, as 
'UPoaOf for nC'3~K^''N II 2, 8 al., 'ItfaySeA. regularly for b^rN, 'leCe"?^ for ^{<nbj< 

1 Or of V\y>ii^ in"'K'"'N. B** cannot be derived pttoneticalty from K'N, only 
the reverse change from yi to '? being in accordance with analogy (cf. in Syriac, 
Nold. Syr. Gr. § 40 C). But if ^ was pronounced softly [i, xxoXyi: GK. § 47" and 
n.), tJ'^ might be written incorrectly for K'K. 

XIV. 47— XV. 2 121 

Jos. 17, 2, 'IfOf^aaK for ^jy^nX I Ki. 16, 31, 'lentjp for "IQN Neh. 7,61, 'lipoPaaX 
(AQ») for bxmS Hos. 10, 14, 'leo-ee/icuT? (cod. A) for ybriK'X i Ch. 4, 19, 
'leVo-at for iK'''K (elsewhere "'^^) i Ch. 2, 13, comp. 'Ie(T)3aa\ for nt^'3■5^'"'N IT 3, 8 
in Aq. Syram. Theod., and in II 23, 8 Luc.^; and for the term, -lov for ilH''- cf. 
^n«^S! U\uov or UXiov, ^n;;j3 Bai/aiov, i Ki. 2, 35, in'^'iajj A)35€iou id. 18, 3 ff. 

51. ^N^2S p] Read ^S^3K ^33, though the error is as old as LXX. 
But already Josephus says {Aft/, vi. 6, 6) NtJ/dos Kat Ketcros 6 SaovAou 
Trarrjp dSeA^ot ^crav oiot Se AfiirjXov. 

52. nNni] frequentative: ' and Sa.n\ would see, etc., a?td would take 
him to him ' = and when Saul saw . . . , he used to take him to him 
{Tenses, §§ 120; 148. i : so II 15, 2. 5 etc.). 'inSDNM is irregular for 
iSDNI : see on 2, 16. 

15. Saul and Amakq. Second rejection of Saul. {Introduction 
to history of David.) 

15, T. rh\!:^ Tix] Position as 14, 35 (see note). Gen. 42, 36 
^i?"^^ '^K Dt. I, 38 P5n ink. lo, 20. xp. 25, 5 ^n^ip ^n^<. Jer. 4, 22 
lyi"" vb "TIN. 30, 14; also (not at the beginning of a sentence) Gen, 
24, 14 nnpn nnx. jud. 14, 3 ^^ np nniN. ^^ is, 17. is. 37, 26 

'D^B'y riniN. x^r. 27, 4 K'p3N nms. 

For other cases of TIX^ THN^ etc. rendered emphatic by being prefixed to a verb, 
cp. {a) after 1, Gen. 12, 12 VIT' "JJlNI ^HN IJlill. Lev. 10, 17 . , , fri3 ririNI. 

II, 33. Dt. 4, 14. 6, 13 nayn inNi. 13, 5- 20, 19 mnn n^ inxi. 2 s. 12, 9 
pj:y ''J3 mnn nnn insi. i Ki. i, e^ 35 . . . ^y t-jj nvn^ ^n^i:; inxi. n, 37; 

Is. 57,11 rn3T N^ "mNI and PNTH iSb TllXI. 58,2. Jer. 9,2 lyT {<^ ^riNl. 
16, II. 46, 28. Ez. 22, 12 nn25J' ^riNI (cf. i ki. 14,9). Hos. 2,i5*>; Lev. 26,33 
nnTN DSnSI. Dt. 4, 20. 6, 32. Ez. 11,7; Ez. 12, 13. 23, 10. 33, 31 ; Job 14, 3 : 
{b) Gen. 41, 13 rhn iriNI *il3 bv ^^K'H tin. Nu. 2 2, 33 : {c) after D:i, 2 S. 2, 7 
'y\ inC'D •'HN D:1; D: 2 S. 8, n : {d) after N^l, ^A. 20,9. Is. 43, 22 TIN n!?1 
nxnp: {e) after O, Gen. 7,1 p*ny Tl'-NI in« *D. 37,4 anX IHN ^D. 
iKi.5, 13. Jer.4, 17 nniD TIN •'3; ch. 21, 10; H tjer. 5, 22 IN^^n n!? 'niNH. 
7, I9t. A pronoun in an emph. position should always be noted by the student. 

iqtJ'Dlj] -sho- (not -shd-) : GK. § 9^ ; and for the metheg § 1 6f (S). 
2. TnpD] ' I will visit,' i. e. punish — the pf. (though unusual in 

^ See further examples in the Supplement, containing the Proper Names, to 
Hatch and Redpath's Concordance to the Septuagint (1900), p. 77 ff. 

122 The First Book of Samuel, 

prose, except in '"IjlOJ) as Jud. 15, 3, expressing determination {Tenses, 
§13; GK. § 106™); and IpS being construed- with an accus. of the 
sin visited, as Hos. 8, 13 = 9, 9 = Jer. 14, 10. The sense mark 
(RV.), ansehen (Keil), is not borne out by usage : nps means to visit 
in/act {Ex. 3, 16. 4, 31), not to observe mentally, or to 'direct one's 
look at ' (Keil). 

':i Db' "IIJ'n] Qb' in a military sense, as i Ki. 20, 12 10''^' "ins*''1 
Tyn hv \ty^''^, and ina^ in xp. 3, 7. Is. 22, 7. In Dt. 25, 18 (of the 
same occurrence) the expression used is Tn^ Tlij"^ "W^, 

3. DDOnnni] LXX, independently of koI 'Icpei/x KaC, has two transla- 
tions of this word, viz. koX efoXe^pevo-et? auroc and koL avaOcfiaTLels 
aurw Kai, both pointing to 1^ 'IK'N b:> n^] iriOinni^ (n for D). Though 
the Hebrew is poor, the combination nevertheless occurs (see on 
5, 10), and as the sequel shews that the na/ton, as well as its belongings, 
was ' banned,' it is best to adopt it. 

3^ p:v njn bhyo] 22, i9t. ntJ'N njn k^^no id. Jos. 6, 21. 8, 25 al. 

lyi , , . d] /rom , . . even unto, i. e. including both, as often, 

4. yr3{J'''l] The Pz'W, as 23, 8t. So i Ki. 15, 22 al. the Hif'il. 
D"'N^t:3] To be pointed probably QN^I?, and identical with 0^9 i"^ 

the 'Negeb' of Judah, Jos. 15, 24, 

5. 3T1] for 3nN»l, i.e. 2nN!l GK. §§ 68s 23d; Kon. i. 390: cf. 
P]N for PI^N Job 32, 11; '•''Snp (as generally understood) Ez. 21, 33; 
pto Pr. 17, 4. The omission of N is somewhat more frequent (though 
rare even then) in Qal : 28, 24 insril ; H 6, i ID'1 (from flDN); 
19, 14 119^; 20, 9 tnril; ^\^. 104, 29 IDh (from f)DN) ; GK. § 68^, 

6. On the Qenites, and their former friendly relations with Israel, 
see Nu. 10, 29 f. Jud. i, 16, where Budde {ZATW. 1887, p. loi, 
and in his Commentary on Judges, ad loc.) is certainly right in 
reading, after MSS. of LXX, ip^rsyn nx for Dyn ns. 

^T]] so 9B (=Bomberg's Rabb. Bible of 1525), Kitt. : Baer and 
Ginsb. n^^: cf. Gen. 19, 14 INST ^D^p ; and see GK. § 22^ (206 1), and 
the Addenda. 

^ Where, in 1. 6 of p. 73 of the Engl, translation, insert ' hitherto ' (i. e. in 
previous editions) after ' When we.' In 1. 2 also ' a question ' would be better than 
' doubtful ; ' for, though the note reads somewhat obscurely, Kautzsch does mean 
to explain the cases quoted in it by the principle of § 20'. 

XV. 2-g 123 

>p^!Dj;] Except here and v. 15 MT. has throughout the chapter 
\h)2V- As the determined noun is needed, it is better in both these 
passages to read with Luc. p?oy. 

^DpKj The metheg, shewing the hireq to be long, appears to indi- 
cate that ihQ punctuators treat the verb as Hif. But the Hif. of flDN 
does not elsewhere occur, and the metheg rests, no doubt, upon a false 
theory as to the nature of the word. Read without metheg, it will be 
the impf. Qal H?^ (as \p. 104, 29), with ^^ shortened to -^ when the 
syllable is rendered toneless by the addition of a sufBx (so in the ptcp. 
'^SDk ^3Jn 2 Ki. 22, 20 S '^;i^i< ch. 24, 5 al.; and in Pt'el D3SDKD 
Is. 52, 12. D?^*??^?^ Job 16, 5 etc.). Comp. Konig, i. 382 f. ; GK. § 68^ 
S]DN, as Jud. 18, 25. xl/. 26, 9. Ehrl. suggests "^2DX (Gen. 18, 23. 24). 

nriNl] Note the emph. pronoun. 

''J''p] Read either pp (as Nu. 24, 22. Jud. 4, 11), or (LXX) ''y\>r\ (as 
V. 6*, 27, 10. 30, 29). 

7. nit^ *]S13 n^'iino] On Shur, see DB. s. v. It appears to have 
denoted the district on the NE. border of Egypt, which gave its 
name to the "W 13"1)0 Ex. 15, 22. Where n7''in was is uncertain. 
In Gen. 2, 11. 10, 29. 25, iS the name most probably denotes a 
region in the NE. of Arabia, on the W. coast of the Persian Gulf ; 
in Gen. 10, 7 it may denote the 'A/SaXlrai, on the African coast, 
a little S, of the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb : but even a region in the 
NE. of Arabia is too remote to define the starting-point of the defeat 
inflicted by Saul upon the Amaleqites. Either n7"'in is here the 
name of a place in or near the country of Amaleq, otherwise unknown, 
or we should simply (with We.) restore D?t?'? {v. 4) : ' the error may 
have arisen through a reminiscence of Gen. 25, 18,' where the phrase 
occurs, closely resembling the one here, ''3D 7y "IJJ'N IIB^ IV n7''inD 
C'lVD, but where n^^in, as has just been said, appears from the 
context to denote a place more distant than is suitable here. 

■•33 ?y] m front of, in geographical descriptions, commonly means 
to the east of (Lex. 818^): so Gen. I.e. i Ki. 11, 7. 

9. CiB'JDri] Explained by Kimchi {Book of Roots, s.v.) in the sense 

* In the parallel passage, 2 Ch. 34, 28 (Baer and Ginsburg, but not 93, Kittel), in 
exactly the same phrase, "^jCDX is pointed as here, with metheg, i. e. as an 
impf. Hif. ! 

124 ^'^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

of W^y^ Q**?^, i.e. young of a second birth, such as had the reputation 
of being superior to firstlings (see Tanhum, quoted by Roed. in the 
Thes. p. 1 45 1*). So Roed. himself (p. 1451^), and Keil. But the 
text reads suspiciously, and the position of 7J? before D''"l3n (instead 
of before the pair of similar delicacies X:i'<'Or\\ CJC'DH) suggests error. 
We. for Dn^n h\l\ D"'3K'?Dn"l would read D''13ni D^JO^'n ' and the best of 
the flocks and the herds, (even) the fat ones (comp. Ez. 34, 16), and 
the lambs,' etc., which undoubtedly forms a better Hebrew sentence, 
and nearly agrees with the rendering of Pesh. Targ. (x''J0''£2ai N"'J''r:t:"i), 
neither of which, at least, appears to have had either D"'J:^'J^: or i^y 
before DHan. D''"13 are mentioned in terms implying that they were 
a delicacy in Am. 6. 4 ; Dt. 32, 14. 

lonnn ^n^< dd31 nDt:3 nas^Dn bi] nas^n means business, occupa- 
iiofi (Gen. 39, 11), and so property on which a person is occupied, 
Ex. 22, 7. 10: here and Gen. 33, 14 specially of property consisting 
in cattle (cf. '"'^i?'?). HTnDJ is a grammatical monstrum, originating 
evidently in the blunder of a scribe. The text had DDJI r\\11 : the 
scribe began by error with the second word, wrote the first two letters 
DJ, then discovered his mistake, but not wishing to make an erasure, 
simply added the letters nD. (There are similar monstra in Ez. 8, 16. 
9, 8.) The words present, however, other difficulties, i^j^^, resuming 
naxi'rsn ^3, is indeed defensible by Dt. 13, i. 14, 6. Ps. loi, 5 al. 
{Tenses, § 197. i, 2) : and for the change of gender there are at least 
parallels which can be adduced (e.g. i Ki. 19, 11 : see GK. § i32d • 
ij/. 63, 2 q'-jj') n"'S pNn with Hitzig's note'); but the use of DDJ is 
very strange (lit. melted away = diseased, consumptive ?). The Ver- 
sions all express a synonym of nn3 — LXX kol e^ouSevw/xeVov, Pesh. 
)L>\m.Nso, Targ. -\^D2), Vulg. et reprobum : and there can in fact be 
no reasonable doubt that riDKD3l must be restored, either for nns D0J1 
or for DDJ1 alone (retaining nriN ^). Indeed, AV. RV. appear both to 
have adopted implicitly this emendation ; for ' refuse ' is no rendering 
of DtD3, though it obviously expresses DNDJ (Jer. 6, 30 marg.) or 

^ * The fern, termination of the adj., once used, can in a way operate forwards, 
so that the second adj. is left in the simplest, most immediate form.' 

" Which is expressed by Pesh. Targ. LXX (Luc), Vulg., and as stated above is 
fully defensible. 

XV. g-i4 125 

noxipa. The omission of the art. with the ptcp., after a subst. defined 
by it, is a further difficulty. The text as it stands expresses the sense 
'But all the nDN7D, being common' (lit. despised) and refuse, they 
banned ' : ' but this contradicts the context ; for some of the HDN^O 
was good, and was spared. The sense demanded by the context, 
viz. ' but such of the n3X?0 as was common and refuse they banned,' 
requires either the presence of the art. in both cases, or its absence 
in both. 

11. nnx»] Lex. 30a, 

12. nN"ip7 , . , D3K'''l] In thorough analogy with Hebrew usage (see 
on 6, 13). LXX, Vulg. express ']^''l, which Th. declares to be a 
' necessary ' insertion : but the renderings of these versions are merely 
accommodations to the idiom of a different language. See besides 
Ct. 7, 13 D'^on^i? nO'DC^J; and Ges. Thes. p. 1406^ (referred to 
by We.). 

^»"i3n] 'The garden-land' (Is. 10, 18 al.), — the word, like other 
proper names with the art. (as nynJn), retaining its appellative force. 
It was a place in the 'hill-country' of Judah (Jos. 15, 55 ; see v. 48), 
mentioned also in ch. 25, 2 ff. ; now el-Kurmul, 7 miles S. of Hebron. 

mni] without the suffix, as 16, 11. But the ptcp. 2''V0 ' is setting 
up ' does not agree with the sequel (which states that Saul had left 
Carmel) : and doubtless ^''ifii < hath set up ' must be read (so LXX 

T] lit. hand, i. e. sign, monument, trophy of the victory : II 18, 18. 

hhin nn^i] Cf. on lo, 8. 

14. nrn] See on 14, 29. The correction 7^^ {ZAW. 1895, p. 317) 
is unnecessary. 

^ 'Vile' (EVV.), unless understood in the old sense of the word {common, 
looked down upon ; Lat. vilis), is too strong, as it is also in Jer. 15, 19. Lam. i, 11 
EVV., and in AV. of Job 40, 4. Phil. 3, 21. See the \fxiitr's Jeremiah, p. 362; 
Minor Prophets, vol. ii (Nahum to Malachi), in the Century Bible, p. 25. 

* So y\i. 18, 18 ; 92, T 2 Cynn ■h'i Q"'?!?? against those who rise up against me 
(as) evil doers; 143, 10 n31t3 ^ni"! thy spirit (being) good; Jer. 2, 21" (but 
rd. JDJ); Ez. 24,13; Hag. i, 4 (cf. GK. § 126'). The adj. v?ithout the art. 
forms a species of predicate : cf. on 2, 23. (II 6, -^ is corrupt : but even were it 
not so, the grammatical rendering 'drave the cart, being a new one' would be 
consistent with the fontext, which, in the case of the phrase here, is just what 
is not the case.) 


126 The First Book of Samuel, 

15. Iti'N] *1K^N is a h'nk, bringing the clause which it introduces 
into relation with what precedes : here the relation is a causal one, 
in that, forasmuch as: 20, 42. 26, 23^. Gen. 30, 18. 31, 49. 34, 13 
(cf. on II 2, 5) : elsewhere, itJ'N may be resolved into the expression 
of a consequence, so thai, as Gen. 13, 16; 22, 14; i Ki. 3, 12. 13; 
2 Ki. 9, 37. 

1 6. f)"in] Dr. Weir thus appositely illustrates the usage of this word : 
'Dt. 9, 14 DT'OB'Ni >jtDO 5|-in. f/^. II, 3 h'^iy^ t\V2^ 1:^5 fi"in. II 24, 16 
Til p|-in. i/a. 37, 8 ?iND pi-in. 46, II lyni isnn.' 

n?vn] the night (that is just past) = last night. Elsewhere always 
of the coming night, as Gen. 19, 5 ; 30, 15 etc. : comp. on 14, 34. 

1"lDt<''lJ Qre "1DX''1, a necessary correction. The opposite of the 
variation noted on 13, 19, See Ochlah we-Ochlah, No. 120 (eleven 
instances of 1 at the end of a word '•"ip X71 3'>n3 cited : among them 
Jos. 6, 7; 9, 7; I Ki. 12, 3. 21; 2 Ki. 14, 13). 

17. 'Though thou art little in thine own eyes, art thou not head 
of the tribes of Israel ? And Yahweh hath anointed thee to be king 
over Israel ' (i. e. thou art in a position of authority, and oughtest 
to have restrained the people). 

18. nrijpnnni] but v. 20 ■'Jy^lni}- ^"^ the pf. Hif. of verbs primae 
gutt., — _ ___ of I and 2 ps. is changed to -^r- -^ after waw consec, 
whether the tone is thrown forward by the waw or not: so '^l^^!!?^ 
Job 14, 19, but ''J!11?^5D] Lev. 23, 30 and often; ''Jp^^Nn Ex. 16, 32, but 
'J^^P^D] Is. 49, 26 ; ^^^V:}}:} Is. 45, I, but ^h\>W\ Ez. 30, 25 ; IjfySj.V.n 
Nu. 20,5, but Ori'ipJini Ex. 13, 19 : and, with no change in the place 
of the tone, I'^I^.V^O Is. 43, 23, but T^"]?J?ni Jer. 17, 4; n'>i)'j?n Ex. 
33, I, but n>i5J?ni Dt. 27, 6; ^'^I'^fr^n Ez. 16, 19, but T^^?^ni Is. 
58, 14; TTO.yn Ex. 9, 16, but in>riipj?ni i Ch. 17, 14. And so ofte^ 
elsewhere: cf. Bottcher, ii. 380 f.; GK. § 63°. 

ens Dn"i73 ny] ' Until they consume them ' cannot be right. Either 
nm ^nib ny (Jer. 9, 15 = 49, 37) must be read (with LXX, Pesh. 
Targ.), or OriN must be omitted (with the Vulg.), as having arisen by 
some confusion out of the preceding Dn-. Drii?3"iy 'until (one, 
people: strictly n?3Dn; see on 16, 4) consume them' is the more 
idiomatic usage: i Ki. 22, 11 Oni^S'iy n-)b?-nj< nJiPl; ^. 18, 38. 

19. ^W\\ for tDyril from Qiy : GK. § 72"; Stade, § 549*". Cf. 
14, 32- 

XV. IJ-2J 127 

20. IK^n] stands as the equivalent of O, after HN"! i8, 15; after 
VT" Ex. II, 7. Ez. 20, 26 (unusually in Ezek. ; see Hitz.). Qoh. 8, 12 ; 
after yntJTi i Ki. 22, 16; and = ""^ recitaiivum (2, 16), as here, 
II I, 4 (cf. 2, 4). Neh. 4, 6 (most probably) ^ Cf. GK. § 157c. 

22. Tt^'pn?] The inf. cstr. with ^, as the subj., as Is. 10, 7b. 

y\i. 118, 8. 9; Qoh. 7, 2. 5; Pr. 21, 9 nt^'ND :j nj3 i^y nn:i6 aiD 
"lan n-'ai n^jnD (contr. 25, 24). 

23. no] 'oftenest in Ezek. (2, 5 etc. nDH n» ITin ""3). Is. 30, 9 

Nin no Dy. Nu. 17, 25 no m. Dt. 31, 27 rw\>r\ ^^-|y-nN1 in^'n^' 

(Dr. Weir). 

P.N] The fundamental idea of |1.X is apparently what is valueless and 
disappointing : and it denotes, according to the context, (i) calamity, 
misfortune (as \\r. 55, 4. Am. 5, 5); (2) naught-y conduct, naughtiness, 
a term of disparagement for wickedness, as JIX ""^ys y\i. 5, 6 and often ; 
and (3) worthlesstiess, a thing of nought, esp. an idol, as Is. dd, 3 ' he 
that burneth incense is no better than /I? '=!"}?? he that blesseth an 
idol;' cf Zech. 10, 2 'the teraphim JIX n3*T speak worthlessness' (see 
further Z^jf. 19^-20*; Parallel Psalter, Glossary, p. 449 f,). 'Idols 
and teraphim,' — the general and the particular, — form, however, an 
unequal pair ; Symm. has rj dvo/x.ta twi/ ctSwAwv, which points to 
D''D"in py ; and Klo. Sm. Bu. Now. Ehrl. are probably right in reading 

D^Din] 19, 13. 16. Gen. 31, 19. 34. 35. Jud. 17, 5. 18, 14. 17. 18. 
20. 2 Ki. 23, 24. Ez. 21, 26. Hos. 3, 4. Zech. 10, 2t. 

l-?-] ^^ pause for "llfSi!?, as constantly in verbal forms, as \^.*1, 
^^-'v", ''^pn (Is. 18, 5), etc., and occasionally in nouns, as *?^?f? Is. 
7, 6 for ^xnp (cf Ezr. 4, 7), W Jer. 22, 14, ■i;]?D Ob. 20, !'V^? 
Zech. 14, 5, :P;^X I Ch. 8, 38 {v. 37, out of pause, ^>*^?) : Ew. § 93% 
Stade, § 107a, GK. § 2 91. IVDn is the abs. inf. Hif. almost with the 
force of a subst. : cf. lOK'n Is. 14, 23, t2i?.f n 32, 17, nain Job 6, 25, 
''^Pl' 25, 2 (Ew. § 156c). The form, with a substantival force, is rare 
in Biblical Hebrew ; but one nearly the same ("'i??'?) is common in 

^ In late Hebrew "ItJ'K appears as = quod with greater frequency : Dan. i, 8 bis, 
Qoh. 5, 4 . . . "W^ 31D (contrast Ru. 2, 22 O). 7, 29. 9, r ; and especially in Est. 
Neh. {passim). 

128 The First Book of Samuel, 

the Mishnah : Siegfried and Strack, Lehrbuch der Neuhebrdischeii 
^/raf/^^ (1884), § 55b. 

The word is, however, a suspicious one. 1^3 is to push ox press 
upon (Gen. 19, 9), or to urge by persuasion (Gen. 19, 3. 33, n. 
2 Ki. 2, 17, 5, 16); and does not occur elsewhere in the Hif. : if 
correct, IVSn can mean only to display pushing (the ' internal Hif.,' GK. 
§ 53*^)> ^' ^'1 '^ '^^ "^f"' forwardness, presui7iption (not ' stubbornness,' 
EVV.). Klo. suggests Sn K?D evil desire, which Bu. adopts ; but this 
is a poor parallel to HD, and cannot be said to be satisfactory. 

^DXl2''"l] '\ in answer to ""i, as v. 26. Hos. 4, 6 edd. (but Baer, 
Gi. Kitt. 1.); cf. Nu. 14, 16. Is. 45, 4. 48, 5 al. : Tefises, § 127 y; 
GK. § iiih. 

*]7lDK)] ' from king ' = ' from being king : ' cf. the fuller form in 
26t>, and the alternative ^"^fJ? in 8, 7. 16, i. So m;3?D nnp^l i Ki. 
15) 13- '^V^ ^^'^.. Is. 7, 8 etc. (Z^x. 583a [b), — towards the bottom). 

28. nia^JOD] The usual word is Hipop .- but the form ri^3^?0D (from 
]7Dip]) occurs besides II i6, 3. Hos. i, 4. Jer. 26, i. Jos. 13, 12. 

21. 27. 30. 3it. Cf. ni3X^f3 Hag. I, i3t from ^^{plP: Stade, § 304^^ 
We., observing that the form never occurs in the absolute state, 
questions the originality of the pronunciation expressed by the plena 
scriptio, and would restore everywhere na^'^JD. 

1vyo]_A(?OT off thee : i Ki. 11, 11^, in the same expression (applied 
to Solomon). For the figure, cf. Py Is. 9, 5. 

29. i'NlB^'' nV3] VrohzhXy the Glory of Israel. The root nV3 appears 
only in certain derivatives in Hebrew ; the manner in which they are 
related is apparent only in Aramaic. nX3 in Syriac is properly 
splenduit, hence the adj. I^IT = Aa/x7rpos Apoc. 22, 16; but in the 
Pe'al ( = Heb. Qal), and more especially in the Ethpa'el, it usually 
appears with the derived sense of inclaruit, Celebris evasit, and so 
victoriam adeptus fuit, triumphavit (cf. Dan. 6, 4) : similarly the subst. 
X^ 3 ■= victory (e.g. Jud. 15, 18 = nyit^D), and the corresponding 
N*jn:>'J in the Targg., as Jud. 7, 18 pyna H'' ^y x:nvJ1 ' and victory by 
the hands of Gideon;' \\i. 35, 23 ''Jni*3 ''"ID 'the lord of my victory.' 
In Heb. nV3 has certainly a sense allied to this in the late passages, 

^ On forms in fiV, see GK. §§ 86'', 95* : more fully Kon. ii. 204-6. 

XV. 2)-) 2 129 

Lam. 3, i8; i Ch. 29, 11 ^; and the expression here used is doubtless 
intended to characterize Yahweh as the Glory or Splendour of Israel. 
Similarly the Versions, but leaning somewhat unduly to the special 
(and derived) sense oi victory : Pesh. ^^|i^*i? om^^ the Illustrious 
or Triumphant one of Israel ; Targ. i?Ni:i'n n''3inVJ '•"iD the lord of 
Israel's victory ; Vulg. Triumphator (no doubt from Aq. or Symm,, 
though their renderings have not been here preserved) : so Rashi 
^Nltr'' h^ IJini'J. AV. (from Kimchi DHDI Dpm) strength: but this 
sense rests upon no philological foundation, and is merely conjectured 
from some of the passages in which n^3 occurs, and where such a 
rendering would satisfy a superficial view of the context. Ges. Ke. 
render fiducia, comparing ^^Ij purus, sincerus, fidelis fuit (used of 
sincerity towards God, Qor. 9, 92, or well-wishing toward men, 
28, II. 19). But it is doubtful if this sense of the Arabic root is 
sufficiently pronounced and original to justify the definite sense of 
confidence being attached to the Hebrew nX3 ^. 

nmn^ Nin DHN N^ •'3] Cf. Nu. 23, 19. Contrast here vv. 11. 35: 
as Le Clerc (quoted by Th.) remarked long ago, the narrative is 
expressed dv^pwTroTra^u)?, the prophecy $€OTrp€Tr(i)<;. 

32. nJiyo] An (implicit) accus. defining the manner in which 
Agag advanced, i.e. an adverbial accusative: cf. nn2 in confidence 
(12, II al.), CnB'^O, 11B'''rD in uprightness (poet.): other examples in 
Ew. § 279C, GK. § iiBq. The sense, however, is not certain, (a) The 
most obvious rendering is voluptuously : cf. •^^"IV voluptuous, ' given to 
pleasures,' LXX rpvcfiepd, Is. 47, 8. U^^IV. ^V ^^f II i, 24. i(/. 36, 9 
TJny iriJ LXX ^eifxAppov? t-^S Tpv(l>rj<; crou. Neh. 9, 25 1Jnj?n''l lyDti^'l 

^ The sense of the root in Aram, explains LXX tls vIkos for nif3(b) in II 2, 26. 
Am. I, II. 8, 7. Jer. 3, 5. Lam. 5, 20 (cf. Hab. i, 4 RV. m.), and rod viicrjaai for 
njfJD;? Hab. 3, 19; and the rend, of ns^JD^ in the Psalms (4, i etc.) by Aq. 
to) viKOTToiai, and by Symm. imviKios ; also of LXX KarfTntv 6 Oavaros laxvcras for 
nif3/ niJOn y^3 in is. 25, 8 (Theod. KamroO-q Oavaros eh vIkos, exactly as I Cor. 
15) 54; Aq. also tUviicos), and LXX toC kviaxoaai for TXSY? in i Ch. 15, 21, and 
Kariaxvovaiv fiov in Jer. 15, 18 for nX3. 

^ ni'3 in Is. 63, 3. 6 is a different word altogether (though identified by Kimchi, 
AV.), being connected with the Arab. 1^ to sprinkle; see Ges. Thes.; Lex. 66^ 
1365 S. 

130 The First Book of Samuel, 

LXX Kox iTpv(f>r]aav^. So Targ.'' Aq. (dTro Tpi;<^eptas, i.e. njnyD), 
Symm. (d/?pos), We. But this is not probable in view of the context. 
((5) Others compare nisnyp in Job 38, 31, which can scarcely be explained 
otherwise than by metathesis from nnjyo bands: hence, here, in 
fetters. So Kimchi. (<:) LXX render rpe/Awv, whence Lagarde very 
cleverly, merely by a change of punctuation, suggests JTilinyD (of the 
same form as ri''3"l'^^ backwards, T\"'ir^\> moiirnmgly), totteringly (GK. 
§ 100^). So Sm. Now. Dh. Ehrlich, probably rightly. 

niDn "ID ID pN] pN in an exclamation, with asseverative force, 
as Gen. 28, 16 nrn Dipon '^"^ ^^ px; Ex. 2, 14 inn ynij pN. It is 
a stronger word than ^J?, which is also used somewhat similarly 
(see 16, 6). 

"10] a subst. bitterness, as Is. 38, 15 ""^'DJ "IJD 7y. "ID is departed, 
gone by, as Am. 6, 7 DTinD nnD "ID") ; and Is. 11, 13 of a state of 
feeling (nsJp). LXX, Pesh. omit ")D, expressing merely the platitude. 
Surely death is bitter ! ^ (In LXX d oww implies the misreading 
of pN as [?n.) 

33. D^K>:o] Jud. 5, 24. 

fjOC'l] Only here. Aq. Symm. Sieo-Trao-ev, Vulg. in frusta concidit, 
Targ. Pesh. n:i*S; LXX more generally lo-^a^ev. Of the general 
sense intended by the narrator there can be no doubt : but whether 
the word used by him has been correctly handed down may be 
questioned. Etymologically ^U^ stands isolated: the Syriac ^t?^ 
fidit (Roed. in Thes.) does not correspond phonetically. Should we 
read VDE';! (Jud. 14, 6al.)? 

34. Tbv] from Gilgal: cf. v. 12 Ti\ 

The Dnn referred to in this chapter, is well explained by Ewald in his 
Antiquities of Israet, pp. 101-106 [E, T. 75-78] *. The word itself is derived 

> Comp. n^jnyo dainties Gen. 49, 20. Lam. 4, 5 CJtytD^ C^DNH . 

^ NpJSO (see Dt. 28, 54 Onq.). Hilari attimo (Ge. Ew. Ke.) gives the word 
a turn which is foreign to the root from which it is derived. Vulg. pinguissimus 
\et tremens of the Clementine text is a doublet, derived from the Old Latin, and 
omitted by all the best MSS.] is based probably on Symm. dPpos. 

s Targ. NDID intD "iJHn lyni takes it as =11?; cf. Jer.6, 28 DmiD ^D ob^ 
= imO Jin''n-|3T bn (Aptowltzer, II, p. 28). 

* See also the art. 'Bann' in Riehm's Handw'drterbucJi des Bibel. Altertums"^ 
(1893); Dillmann's note on Lev, 27,28f. ; and EB. Ban; DB. Curse. 

from a root which in Arabic means io shut off, separate, prohibit C'.^-, whence 
the Jiara>n or sacred territory of the Temple of Mecca, and the hariin (^^^)) the 

secluded apartment of the women, applied also to its occupants, i.e. the ' harem 'i. 
In Israel, as in Moab, the term was used of separation or consecration to a deity. 
Mesha in his Inscription (11. 14-18^) states how, on the occasion of his carrying 
away the 'vessels of Yahweh' from Nebo, and presenting them before his god 
Chemosh, he 'devoted' 7000 Israelite prisoners to ' 'Ashtor-Chemosh.' Among 
the Hebrews, the usage was utilized so as to harmonize with the principles of their 
religion, and to satisfy its needs. It became a mode of secluding and rendering 
harmless anything which peculiarly imperilled the religious life of either an 
individual or the community, such objects being withdrawn from society at large 
and presented to the sanctuary, which had power, if needful, to authorize their 
destruction. The term occurs first in the old collection of laws called ' The Book 
of the Covenant' (Ex. 20, 23 — ch. 23), Ex. 22, 19 with reference to the Israelite 
who was disloyal to Yahweh (HQ^ ^"h Tl^n nnn> D'^H^N^ Hnt) ^ More com- 
monly we read of its being put in force against those outside the community of 
Israel : thus it is repeatedly prescribed in Deuteronomy that the cities and religious 
symbols of the Canaanites are to be thus ' devoted ' to the ban ; and the spoil of a 
heathen city was similarly treated, the whole or a part being ' devoted' or 'banned' 
according to the gravity of the occasion (Dt. 7, 2. 25 f, 20,16-18). Instances of the 
Din, as exemplified historically, are recorded in Nu. 21, 2f. (after a vow). Dt. 2,34. 
3,6. Jos. 6, 17-19 (the whole spoil was here made herem or ' devoted:' a part of this 
herein was afterwards secreted by Achan, as it was reserved by Sanl on the occasion 
to which the present chapter refers). 8, 2. 26 al. Here, it is put in force, excep- 
tionally, against an external political enemy of Israel *. 

niN"!^ .,,510'' N^l] But see 19, 24. AV. 'departs from its usual 
fidelity when it softens this absolute statement, and writes that 
" Samuel came no more to see Saul" ' i^OTJC.^ 130)' 

^ Also IVJL harain, sanctuary (as in the title Hardm ' es-Sherif, or Noble 
Sanctuary, applied to the area enclosing the ' Dome of the Rock ' at Jerusalem, on 
which the Temple formerly stood) ; and 1° s:* munarrain, the sacred (first) month 
of the Arabs, in which it was forbidden to carry on war. 

^ Quoted and translated in the Appendix to the Introduction. 

' Comp. Dt. 13, 13-18 (the idolatrous city in Israel). 

* In AV. the verb D''"inn is generally rendered utterly dest>-oy and the subst. 
mn accursed thing; but these terms both express secondary ideas, besides 
having the disadvantage of being apparently unrelated to each other : in RV. 
by the imiform use of devote and devoted thing, in the margin, if not in the text 
(for 'utterly destroy,' with marg. ' Heb. devote,' has been retained in the text 
where the reference was to persons), the idea attaching to the Hebrew is more 
clearly expressed, and the connexion between the different passages in which the 
word occurs is preserved. 

K 2 

132 The First Book of Samuel, 

16, i-i3> David anointed by Samuel at Bethlehem. 

16, I. Vnot^rD ''JXl] a circumst. clause = ' when / have rejected 
him : ' Tenses, § 160. 

•"Dn^n-nin] like ''V^m^rrr\''1, etc. ; see on 6, 14. 
••!>... "•rr'N-l] Gen. 2 2, 8. 

2. ''Jnni hsiW yotJ'l] II 12, 18 would support the construction that 
treated these words as under the government of T'N {Tenses, § 115, 
p. 130), though they might in themselves be construed independently 
{ib. § 149 ; GK. § 159S: Gen. 44, 22 noi l^aXTlN ntyi). 

TlNa ''"h nnr^] Note the order: Gen. 42, 9. 47, 4. Nu, 22, 20. 
Jos. 2, 3; Jud. 15, 10; ch. 17, 25. 28b, 

3. nan] Read nar^ as z;. 5^. 

"•DiNl] Note the emph. pronoun. 

'yhvi. "1»N IB^n] IOX = /<? name, designate, as Gen. 22, 2^. 9. 26, 2 ; 
43, 27 ; II 6, 22 ; 2 Ki. 6, 10. 

4. 1n^?'^pi5 . . . nirT'l] See on 6, 13 ; and cf. 21, 4. 

*lt3K''l] sc. 'T?^'^. When the verb appears in Heb. without a subject 
expressed, the implicit subject is — not one, as in English or French — 
but the cognate participle "i?^<n. The explanation is confirmed by the 
fact that cases occur in which the cognate participle is actually 

expressed, Dt. 17, 6 nron nio"". 22, 8 ^s3n ^Q'' jQ. II 17, 9 y^B^n yroc'i. 
Is. 28, 4 nns HNnn hnt" nti'N. Ez. i8, 32 nnn mm. 33, 4 yoti'i 

nsiB>n i?")p nx yoit^'n ; cf. Jud. 11,31 '^l >«??.'! "^^^ ^^l'''"' : with an indef. 
ptcp. Nu. 6, 9 vl'y DD niD'' ""Dl. Am. 9, i. The idiom is already 
rightly explained by the mediaeval Jewish grammarians, as Ibn Ezra ^, 
e. g. on Gen. 48, i eiDV^ "IDS'"! (the stock example of the idiom) sc. 
""?^i^; Is. 8, 4 xB^'' sc. x^'Dii; Am. 6, 12 Dnp33 t^'nn^ DN sc. tJ'ihri, 
and constantly; Kimchi on i Ki. 22, 38 fiDV^ "1DN''1 1M flUiK'n sid:^''1^ 
Comp. Ew. § 294^ (2) ; Hitzig on Am. 3, 1 1 tmni ' namely, Tl'isn ; ' 
GK. § 144'*. However, some thirty MSS. read here 'nOK''1. 

^ Who, however, is apt to extend unduly the principle involved. Comp. Fried- 
lander, Essays on the Writings of Ibn Ezra, p. 134 : W. Bacher, Abraham Ibn Esra 
als Granimatiker (Strassburg, 1882), p. 143'. 

2 And similarly with the plural, as Is. 2, 20 1^ VkJ'y TiJ'N sc. n''^^r\. 

XVI . i-y 133 

•]X13 D^K'] The interrogation being indicated by the tone of the 
voice (of. on 11, 12). So, with the same word, II 18, 29. 2 Ki. 9, 19 
{vv. II. 17. 18. 22 DvB'n). There is no occasion, with Gratz, Die 
Psalmen, p. 116, and H. G. Mitchell (as cited in GK. § 150* note), 
to restore \\. Lit. 'Is thy coxnmg peace ? ' the snhst. peace being used 
in preference to the adj. peaceable. So often, as 25, 6 D17K' nriKI 
Dl^tr ']T\'y\; Gen. 43, 27 73N tih^n; i Ki. 2, 13 "^Jja m^t^'H. On 
the principle involved see Tenses, § 189, GK. § 141*^; and comp. 
Delitzsch's note on Job 5, 24 (ed. 2). 

5. I^J'Ipnn] viz. by lustrations (Ex. 19, 14). Cf. Ex. 19, 10. 22. 
Jos. 3, 5. Job I, 5. 

nan "tin Onxai] LXX express Di*n ''^^ nr\r\^m. MT. is regarded 
by We. Bu. Sm. Now., as an explanation of this, which they prefer, as 
being more original, and less tautologous with the following N*ip"'1 
nih nrh. 

6. ^n] So often, in an exclamation, to add force to the expression 
of a conviction (not necessarily a true one) : Gen. 44, 28 ; Jud. 3, 24. 
20, 39; ch. 25, 21; Jer. 10, 19; i//. 58, 12. 62, 10 al. 

7. nina] Taken usually (GK. § 132^) as a neuter adj., with the force 
of a subst. : cf P"!? Ex. 15, 16. But the st.c. of I!I33 is four times 
Hj?; so it is prob. intended as an tn/.c. (Kon. iii, 578; Ehrl.). No 
doubt I^?2, and in Ex. 15, 16 P"]ii, should be read. 

niNH nNT" IB'N] LXX expresses in addition DNni^NH nN"l\ which 
must have fallen out accidentally. For "IK'N, IK'N? must be restored; 
the passages in which "itJ'N may be rendered as (Jer. 48, 8. i//. 106, 
34 ^) are not parallel in form to the one here. 

D''3"'y,1 py in the sing, means /00k, appearance, Lev. 13, 55. Nu. 11,7; but the 
dual seems so unsuitable to express this idea that in Lev. 13, 5. 37 S^V"^ must 
almost certainly be read for VJ''y2. Klo. D^J^J? ""si? ; Bu. C^JJ HNIDb according 
to that which the eyes behold (Is. 11,3. Dt. 28, 34; cf. inNIO h^ 13371 i?N just 
before). This does seem to be the sense : the contrast between inner and outer is 
expressed not directly {'■looketk at the appearance '), but indirectly. For the pathah 
in 'J?^, see GK. 358. 

^ Where T^N is properly that which, and may be so rendered. But the writer 
cannot have intended here to say that ' God seeth not that which man seeth ! ' In 
Dt. 15, 14 read "IC^'Ni for "IK'S: a "2 has dropped out after the preceding "2. 
In Is. 54, 9. Jer. 33, 22 the construction is doubtful : but the sense that which, as 
the direct object of a verb, is excluded by the following |3 (cf. Lex. Ss*"). 

134 "^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

9. noB'] So 17, i3t; nyctj' II 13, 3. 32!; n'VOK' i Ch. 2, 13. 20, 7 

= II 21, 21 Qret; ''yOK' II 21, 21 Kt.t 

11. |t3pn] with a superlative force: GK. § 133s. 

njni] without the suffix, as the subject referred to immediately 
precedes : cf. 15, 12. 30, 3. 16. Gen. 37, 15; and on 10, 11. 

303] usually explained as meaning to sit round the table or divan. 
Dr. Weir writes : ' LXX ov firj KaraKXiOw/xev, Vulg. nofi disciimbemus, 
Targ. "^n^liiD? surround, which is used in the Targ. of sitting at meat, 
i\,. I, I. 26, 4. 5. Gen. 27, 18 = niK' [and in the Af'el, ch. 20, 5. 
24. 25]. In all these passages it corresponds to the Heb. 1^^. Syr. 
.*a3o»/ )) / will not return. D3D is nowhere else used in the sense 
supposed. Perhaps we might read 35J':.' However, 33D is used in 
the Hif. (2??n) in post-Bibl. Heb. (e.g. Pesahim 10, i) of sitting (or 
reclining) round a table at a meal (cf. also 3DD Ct. i, 12); and the 
word may have been used in this sense much earlier. 

12. Ci'^y HQ'' Dy] So 17, 42 : but the expression is very remarkable 
and anomalous. It is contrary to usage or analogy for Dy to be used 
with an adverbial force (Ew. § 352c; Keil; AV. 'withal'): if the 
text be sound, HD^ must be a neuter adj., like n33 in z'. 7 : ' together 
with beauty of eyes.' Gratz suggests Cibj? (17, 56) for Dy : so also 
Max Krenkel in the ZATW. 1882, p. 309. Sm. Now. agree. 

••X^] in pause for ""N^. : GK. §§ 29™ end, 93^. Elsewhere in this 
connexion ns'lD (71)310 is said (Sm.) : Gen. 24, 16. 26, 7. II 11, 2. 

16, 14-23. First account of David's introduction to Saul. David is 

brought into attendance upon the king for the purpose of soothing 

him, during his fits of madness, by his minstrelsy, and is made his 


14. inny3l] The pf. with waw conv. (not simple waw) with a freq. 

force (cf. 15 end, the ptcp.). The word (which is a strong one) occurs 

only here and t'. 1 5 in prose S being elsewhere confined to poetry — 

chiefly the Book of Job. 

''"'' nn] "'"'• nn as good spirit is opposed to '•"'' DXD nn or 

D^^i'N ni*l as evil spirit. This distinction is strictly maintained in 

^ Except the Nif., which is found in late Hebrew (thrice). 

XVI. g-20 135 

MT. : only 19, 9 would form an exception, but there Q^^/N nn 
should doubtless be read with LXX for ^"^ nn ' (We.). 

15. :^py3rp] GK. § 80s. 

16. 'jl ICN''] ' Let our lord, now, command, thy servants are before 
thee, let them seek,' etc. There seems to be some disorder in the 
sentence. The roughness and abruptness of the Heb. (which is 
concealed in RV.) is extreme: LXX, in far better accord with the 
usual form of a Hebrew period, express ^E'pn^ T??:^ ^n?i? NrnDN* 
(so We. Sm. Now.). n»S'' was probably originally "iCX"" (see Introd. 
§ 4. I c); and 13 JIN, inserted as an expression of courtesy which was 
desiderated, was intended to be taken as a vocative : but "i»X^ being 
ambiguous, it was taken actually as a nom., and so the pronunciation 
"IPX'' (in lieu of 7'^^'') became fixed. But as "ICN, to say, requires to 
be followed by the words said, we must, if we adopt this, read ysi'V 
for IIDN"* (cf. II 14, 12). Or, following a suggestion of Ehrlich, we 

might read T-jsi? i^yi "11332 pjD yT' ^^^ inay iK'pai i:jin* xmoK"- 

'J1 iTni (cf. I Ki. I, 2). 

"11333 pjJO yT] ' knowing, as a player with the harp ' (cf. Ew. 
§ 2856). A particular case of the principle by which, in Hebrew 
syntax, one verb appears as supplementing or completing the sense 
of another (on 2, 3). But perhaps the inf. |2.3 should be read, as 
V. 18 : cf. I Ki. 3, 7. Is. 7, 15, For yT*, as denoting technical skill, 
cf. I Ki. 9, 27 DN"i ^ynv. Am. 5, 16 ^T\i "-ynv , i Ch. 12, 32 nj''3 ^ynv 
D^ny^, Is. 29, II. 

\'V1 J33l] To specify in detail the instrument or means by which 
an action takes place, even though to our mode of thought it may 
appear superfluous, is very Hebraic : LXX 111333 is anything but 
an improvement. See v. 23. 18, 10. 19, 9; also such phrases as 
trN3 Eln5^^ etc. 

17. \lh 3^D^rD] Ez. 33, 32 PJ 3tpt?!|; Is. 23, 16 p3 n^DH. 

18. ""^h p] '« son of Jesse:' see GK. § 129". 
h'^n 1133] See on 9, i. 

"131 1133] LXX o-o</)os Aoyo), Vulg. prudentem in verbis, i. e. clever, 
capable in speech. i^Ready in speech, Jluenl, is D''131 K^N Ex. 4, 10.) 
Cf. Is. 3, 3 '^V(l P^? clever in enchantment. 

20. Dn? lion] If the text be correct, this will mean an ass laden 

136 The First Book of Samuel, 

with bread. But the expression 'an ass of bread' is peculiar; and 
as elsewhere Dn^ is regularly numbered (by loaves), it is quite 
possible that nicn is a corruption of HK'l^n or mc'y : LXX yofi.op, i. e. 
noy ^ favours the latter. 

21. ''JD^ loy] To ' stand before,' said of a single occasion, is equiva- 
lent to to ' present oneself before ' (Gen. 41, 46. 43, 15. Ex. 9, 10 al. : 
Lex. 763^ bottom): when used of a constant relation, it acquires the 
force of ' stand before so as to be in attendance on ; ' see the next 

22. ''33^ nn N3 TTOy] ^JD^ lOy is an idiom denoting to be in attefi- 
dance upon one, or, as we should naturally say, to ' wait upon : ' i Ki. 
I, 2; 10, 8 of Solomon's courtiers (cf 12, 8. Jer. 52, 12): ib. 17, i. 
18, 15. 2 Ki. 3, 14. 5, 16 of Elijah and Elisha as the ministers of 

1 See Ex. 16, 36 LXX : so Vodova]\ = i?N''jny, VoOoKia = H'^bw, ra^a = T\)V, 
Tonoppa = niOy, Zo-^opa (Gen. 13, 10), Zo~fop (Jer. 48 [31], 34), or Xrj-^aip (Gen. 
14, 2 al.) = "lyi^, rat or (Gen. 12, 8) A77ai = '•yn (Ai), TatySaX = ^3^y , ^oywp 
= "liyS, Bfe\(pe-(oop = ~liyD"^y2, XoBoWoyotJiop and ea\ya = "IDy^IlD and 7yiri 
(Gen. 14, i), 'Fayav (Gen. 11, 18. Luke 3, 35) = lyi, 'Pa7o«;7;\ = bxiyi, Toftpa. 
and XcoyaK = msy and ^jyit? (c^ 13, 17), TaiSaS = HT-y (Gen. 4, 18), Tf^ap 
(Ta(])(p, Taicpa) = nD"'y (Gen. 25, 4. I Ch. 1 , 33 [cf. 2, 46. 47]. Is. 60, 6) : add Gen. 
36, 2 pyn^ :S.eBfywv, 14 D^y 'leyXoiM, 23 p^y ra;Xa)C, ^J^^y ra(/37;X, 35 JT'iy 
rteeai/i (so I Ch. I, 46), 40 r\)bv ra;Xa ; Nu. i, 8 lyi^ :Saiyap ; 33, 35 al. 12} fVify 
^<(rCT^co^' (racrtcuf) Ta^fp, 44.45 (D)''''y Taj, 46 flOpy reX/^oif ; Jos. 15, 59 myO 
MaYapcD^; 19,11 H^yiD Mapa7eA.5a; 12 yS"* *a77aj, 21,18 pD7y TafiaXa 
[i Ch. 6, 45 (60) ncby raA€,4€&] ; i Ki. 5, 11 (4, 27) fn^N rai^a.' (irT-y or fn''3 ?) ; 
16, 28 VaPov^a (of Asa's mother illlTy in an addition to MT. ; not with T 22, 42. 
2 Ch. 20, 31) ; I Ch. I, 9 nroyi T€7Aia ; 2, 47 <^W ^ayae (Al. 2070^) ; 4, 9 ylV 
'lyaPrjs (also d;s 70/3?;? for 2i*y2) ; 4, 14 msy To(pfpa ; 9, 4 TVW ro^Set ; 42 nOpy 
TaiieXte; ib. HIDiy Ta^acc^ (but not so 8,36. 12,3. 27,25); 11,32 ""nmyn 
Tapa^ai69i. In Arabic, the soft and hard sounds of y are distinguished by a 
diacritical point (p , p) : in Hebrew, though no such sign has been adopted, it is 
clear, from the transliteration of LXX, that y had in some words a harder and 
stronger sound than in others (comp. Stade, § 63"). See further on this subject 
the studies of Rfi2i2ka in Z. fiir Ass. xxi (1908), p. 293 ff., and Flasher in ZAW. 
xxviii (1908), pp. 194 ff., 3031?. Rfizieka purports to give lists of a// proper names 
in the OT. containing y, with their LXX transliterations (but his readings are based 
on the text of Tisch., which sometimes differs from that of Swete'^, which is based 
(for cod. B) on the photograph published in 1 890) ; Flasher's lists are limited to the 
names occurring in Genesis. Neither perhaps explains quite satisfactorily how it 
happens that 7 represents y in many words in which the corresponding word (or 
root) in Arabic has p , and not p (Ru2iCka, p. 302, cf. 339 f.). 

XVI. 21— XVI L I 137 

Yahweh : elsewhere it is applied technically to the priest as in atten- 
dance upon Yahweh, Dt. 10, 8. 18, 7. Jud. 20, 28. Ez. 44, 15. 2 Ch. 
29, II ; and to the Leviie as in attendance upon the congregation or 
i\\t people, to discharge menial duties for them (see e. g. i Ch. 9, 27-9. 
31-2. 2 Ch. 35, 11), Nu. 16, 9. Ez. 44, II. See more fully the 
writer's note on Dt. 10, 8 (p. 123)^ It is a pity that in passages such 
as Nu. 16, 9. Dt. 10, 8 to 'wait upon' (with a marg. ' Heb. stand 
be/ore') has not been adopted in EVV. : it may be doubted whether 
many English readers understand what to ' stand before the congrega- 
tion ' means. 

23. Notice the series of perfects with waw conv. expressing what 
happened habitually, and represented rightly in the Versions (impff. 
in LXX, Vulg. ; ptcpp. in Targ. Pesh.^). 'b nni as Job 32, 2ot. 

'b 2IDI] In b 210, 21U is a verb, ' to be good /<?' = ' be well with : ' 
Nu. II, 18. Dt. 5, 30 al. 

nyin nn] nyin is an adj. (not a subst. in the gen.) as appears 
(i) from the analogy of 15^ 16^; (2) from the fact that nyin is not 
used as a qualifying genitive. Comp. above, on 12, 23. For the 
conception of the 7\V^ nn, cf. Jud. 9, 23. 

17, I — 18, 5. Second accoimt of David's introduction to Saul. David, 

a shepherd youth from Bethlehem, attracts the king s attention by 

his victory in single combat over Goliath. 

17, I. nDlb*] One of the towns in the Shephelah (Jos. 15, 35), 

generally identified with esh-Shuweikeh (11 45 ft.), on the N. slope of 

a range of low hills running E. and W., 14 miles W. of Bethlehem. 

The 'Vale of Elah' {v. 2) is immediately below it, on the N. It is (Bu.) 
strategically important, as it is close to a number of valleys and roads leading 
up to Hebron, Bethlehem, and elsewhere; the large PEF, Map marks a Roman 
road leading up to Bethlehem. LXX have 'S.oKxooe. The pi. may be original ; 

^ Dr. Orr {Frobl. of the T. p. 192) seeks to shew that to ' stand before Yahweh ' 
does not denote distinctively priestly functions. But it is idle to argue that to 
' stand before Yahweh ' means nothing more than to ' stand ; ' and in 2 Ch. 29, 1 1 
the last word D'~lt3p?01 shews that the writer has priests {v. 4) in his mind ; for to 
bum incense was an exclusively priestly duty. See the thorough examination of 
the idiom in McNeile, Deuteronomy, its Place in Revelation, 1912, p. 74 ff* 

* Cf. the same versions in i, 3. 7, 16. Ex. 33, 8-10 al. {Tenses, p. 146). 

138 The First Book of Samuel, 

for (We.) Eus. {Ono/?i. 292, 32-4) says that there were tivo villages of this name, 
an upper and a lower, 9 miles above Eleutheropolis (which agrees fairly with the 
site of esh-Shuweikeh, 7 miles NE. of Eleutheropolis). 

Bliss {PEFS. 1900, p. 97 f.) doubts this site, as it shews no signs of pottery 
earlier than Roman times ; and suggests Tell Zakariya (so called from a wely 
dedicated to the father of John the Baptist), 3 miles below esh-Shuweikeh, on the 
same side of the Wady, where an Isr. fortress has been excavated {ib. 1899, 
pp. 10-36, 89-98), supposing the old name to have been transferred to esh- 

miiT^ -15J'X] Cf. I Ki. 19, 3; 2 Ki. 14, II (of Beersheba); i Ch. 
13, 6 (of Qiryath-ye'arim) : also DTlK'^a^ IB'N i Ki, 15, 27. 16, 15; 

PTV^ '•\^^ lb. 17, 9: Jud. 18, 28. 19, 14 pn''Ji^ 'w\^ r\'^y^r\. 20, 4. 

npry] Mentioned next to Sochoh in Jos. 15,35; ^'^ important 
strong city (Jer. 34, 7. 2 Ch. 11, 9). The site is not known: Tell 
Zakariya (confused by Bartholomew in G. A. Smith's Maps with the 
village Zakariya opposite: see Rob. ii. 21), 'Askalun (i mile S. of 
Tell Zakariya), and other sites, have been conjecturally suggested. 

D''OT DQX] A place, not identified, between Sochoh and 'Azekah. 
The name, though peculiar, is supported by i Ch. 11, 13 (the parallel 
to II 23, 9; see note there) D''?D1"DS. LXX (B) has E<^ep/x€/x, other 
MSS. aecjiipfjiaeLix, cra^ap/xetv, etc., which, however, lead to nothing. 
Aq. iv Trepan Ao/xei/x agrees with MT. (for Trepas = D2K in Aq., see 
Is. 5, 8. 52, 10 al.). In view of i Ch. 11, 13, and of there being no 
support from Aquila, D'^on "I3y3 (Kitt.), of the stream running down 
the Wady, is a very doubtful emendation. 

2. n^NH poy] The 'Vale of the Terebinth'- {v. 19. 21, lot), the 
' broad depression between hills ' (on 6, 1 3), formed by the junction 
of two valleys, from the S. and E., which unite on the E. of esh- 
Shuweikeh ; the valley then narrows to form W. es-Sanl (the ' Wady 
of Acacias'), \vhich afterwards runs down westwards, past the shining 
white rock of Tell es-Safiyeh, very probably Gath (on 6, 1 7), into the 
Philistine plain (see further Cheyne, Devout Study of Criticism, 85 f ; 
EB. s. v. Elah ; and Photograph No. 443 of the Pal. Expl. Fund). 

3. DiTJ""! ^?''J^1] 'with the ravine between them.' The ravine is 
probably the deep and narrow gorge cut out by the stream running 
down the vale on the N. of esh-Shuweikeh, mentioned in the note on 
V. 2 (fl. G. 227 f. ; Conder, Tent Work, 279). 

The ptcpp. describe the continuous position of the parties during 

XVII. 7-7 139 

the incidents about to be related. The Israelites would be on one of 
the hills NE. of esh-Shuweikeh, on the opposite side of the ^y:^^- 

4. CJan t^^s] i. e. the man of the fxeTaix/Jnov, who came forward as 
the ixe(rLTi]<; to bring the warfare to a close. Kimchi : NVV iVTl^ ""S? 

a''j2n '^f^a NipJ m^iycn *nc' p2 cr dv \ 

n'^by] The same fern, termination occurs in other old Semitic 
(mostly Canaanitish) names: nm (m.) Gen. 26,26 (Philistine); 
DDb'a (f.), nbno (f.), niiDs (ch. 9, i), nii33 (i Ki. n, 20— perhaps 
Edomite), nm and nmrD Gen. 36, 13. 23 ; and in Nabataean, Euting, 
Nahatdische Inschriften, pp. 73, 90-2, as nnin (= 'Kpira'i 2 Cor. 

II, 32), n-ij3 (m.), nxnj (f.), nyjo (m.), nio (m.), m^^y (m.), al. 

(several of these similarly in Arabic) ^. 

5. In i\IT, the giant's weapons of defence are of bronze, those 
of attack are of iron. Here there is undoubtedly a consistency, which 
is badly disturbed in LXX (We.). 

□'•b'pb'p] 0/ scales (of fish, Lev. 11, 9 al. ; of a crocodile, Ez. 29, 4), 
i. e. scaled armour. For the form, cf. D'SysV, D'h^ Is. 18, 5. ^'^^)^ 
Cant. 5,11. D^Jjinnn Qoh. 12,5 (Kon. ii. 91 f., cf. 181, 452 «•)• 
5000 shekels of bronze was probably c. 220 lbs. av. (Kennedy, DB. 
iv. 904 ff.). 

6. nrii'D^] nhi'pi (We.) is preferable. 

'V\ ilT^l] Keil quotes appositely (from Bochart) II. 2. 45 al. d/x</)t 8' 
ap wfjLOLo-iv (SdXeTo ^'<|>os apyvporjXov. jHO —javelin : see V. 45 and 
Jos. 8, 18. 

7. }*m] Read, with the Qre, and the parallel, II 21, 19, |*yi, i.e. 
and the shaft. 

DiJIN nUO] LXX in II 21, 19. I Ch. 11, 23. 20, 5 avriov', i.e. 
(Kennedy in his interesting art. Weaving in EB., iv. 5284 f) the 
weaver's 'shaft,' or 'leash-rod' (Lat. liciatorium), used for holding 

1 Some of the Jews imagined fancifully that the word described Goliath's mixed 
parentage : Lagarde's Prophetae Chaldaice, p. xvi (from the margin of the Cod. 
Reuchl.): ^D T'^Tl^XT {noXiiMipxos) N^nOI^ID ^123 .'•O^Cri^Dirin 

n^b: nsio "jn f» mm nany pi p na^c' p mm pti'rotr p p'yj ^nin 

lies'. (pD^33 pi. of D''J3 = 7eVos.) The same tradition evidently underlies the 
Vulg. vir spirius. Cf. Aptowitzer, ZAIV. 1909, p. 244. 

2 And in many names oi places. Comp. Tenses, § 181 iiote. 

140 The First Book of Samuel, 

the threads of the warp apart, while the shuttle, carrying the weft, was 
passed between them. 

8. D3^ lis] In all probability this is an error for Dai? nni (as 

I Ki. 18, 25. Jos. 24, 15: and ^!? "in3 II 24, 12 ||). m3 in Heb. 
means to eat food: and the meaning select, choose, is not substantiated 
for it by either Arabic or Aramaic. (So also Dr. Weir.) 

9. 10. ""JN] Notice the emph. pronoun. 

10. iDDin] nin is to reproach (sc. with taunts), i.e. to dejy. 
12-31. We here reach the first of the considerable omissions in 

LXX as compared with MT. These verses are not in cod. B ; and 
though they are supplied in cod. A, they form no part of the original 
and genuine LXX. This may be inferred from the diiferent style of 
the translation, which (i) adheres more closely to the existing MT. 
than is the case in the book generally ; (2) deviates in the rendering 
of particular words, as KotXas t^s Spvos 16 against KoiXas 'HAa 21, 9 ; 
/Aco-aios 23 instead of hvvaTo<i 4 for D^33n t'"'N, VoXiaO 6 4>tAio-Ttatos ib. 
against VoXlolO 6 dAAd^uAos 21, 9. 22, 10; comp. also in the aUied 
passage vv. 55-8 apxoiVTrj<s Swa/Acws for ^<3^{n "IC against apx^yrpar-qyo^ 
12, 9. 14, 50. 26, 5: icrTr]\o)6r] 16 against Karea-Trj (see 3, lO. ID, 19. 
23. 12, 7. 16) is of less weight, as it may have been chosen on account 
of the particular sense of a^fTliI, and recurs in a similar context 

II 23, 12. 

12. nrn] Contrary to grammar, as well as unsuitable. 'This 
Ephraimite' would be nrn TnDNn C'^Nn : but. the word th's is out 
of place, — for the paraphrase (Vulg.) de quo supra dictum est (i. e. 
Jesse, in ch. 16) is inadmissible. Still, as the verse, being really 
superfluous after ch. 16, only stands here as introducing a narrative 
originally unconnected with ch. 1 6, it is possible that ntn is a late and 
unskilful insertion made with the view of identifying the Tnax K'\S 
here mentioned with the '•tJ''' of ch. 1 6. Or it might be an error for 
n^n (Pesh. : so Dr. Weir, comparing II 4, 4), though in point of fact 
no verb is required (see 25, 2. i Ki. 11, 26). Ehrlich thinks it 
a corruption of Nin, and makes the plausible suggestion that n'-^D Nin 
mm'' Dn^ is a gloss, intended to shew that ^mSX did not mean 
Ephraimite (1,1 al.), but Bethlehemite. 

D>33 n3»tr lh] Cf. on I, 2. 

XVII. 8-1 s 141 

D"'::'JS2 N2] The text was already the same, when the translation 
of cod. A was made : but ' and the man in the days of Saul was aged, 
entered in among me?i ' — which is the only rendering that is justifiable — 
affords no intelligible sense. The most obvious correction is the 
omission of N2 (Hitzig) ; D''•k^'JX3 fpf will then mean * aged among 
men.' Gratz, after Pesh., would read D'^^'? N3 * entered into years ' 
(so LXX (Luc.) iXr]Xv6w<; iv Itcctiv). Against the first, We. argues 
that the parallels D'':^•J3 nSM, Am. 2, 16, cV^Aos iv av^pda-iv etc. are 
incomplete, IpT not expressing a distinction among things in other 
respects similar, as HQ'' and ia-Oko^ do. Against the second proposal 
is the fact that the phrase in use is always D''D"'n N3 \pf (Gen. 18, 11. 
24, I. Jos. 13, I. 23, I (cf. 2). I Ki. I, it). In face of this constant 
usage, it is extremely questionable whether D''3t^*3 N3 can be regarded 
as a legitimate and idiomatic alternative for CD''! N2. Klo., for 
13^''1 : CirJNa Nn ipT, conjectured very cleverly non^ron ''{^JN2 Nnrp fpT 
was too old to enter in aviong, etc. (with, naturally, T\^b^ for the follow- 
ing ntJ'^K') ; and Bu. accepts this. It may well be right. 

13. 13?n , . . "I3?''l] One of the two verbs is superfluous. The 
theory (Ew. § 346c «.) that isi^n is annexed for the purpose of giving 
')D?''1 the force of a plupf., is artificial and contrary to analogy. No 
other example of such a usage occurs in OT., cases of resumption, 
after a long intervening clause, being readily intelligible, and resting 
upon a different footing : e.g. Dt. 4, 42 DJ1 ; 18, 6 N31 ; Jer. 34, 18-20 
TinJI, etc. (see on 25, 26). Unless the conjecture mentioned in the 
last note be accepted, lD?n here may be due to a copyist's eye having 
glanced by error at the following verse, where the word occurs (rightly) 
between the same words. 

14. Nin] Gen. 2, 14; 9, 18 etc. : Tenses, § 199. 

15. 3K^1 '=];'n] 'Speaker's Comm. "was gone," quite arbitrarily' 
(Dr. Weir). Was gone would be expressed, of course, by ^?n *ini 
3^^1 (see 9, 15) : the participles can only be meant to describe David's 
custom at the time : RV. rightly, wefit to and fro. The verse is no 
doubt an addition made by the compiler of the Book for the purpose 
of accounting for David's absence from the court of Saul, after 16, 21 f. 
In fact, however, according to the narrative embodied in this chapter, 
David was still unknown to Saul {vv. 55-58). See the note after 18, 5. 

142 The First Book of Samuel, 

pyjo] from attendance on Saul : see Jud. 3, 19. Gen. 45, i. Mr. Deane 
(David: his Life and Times, p. 14) has omitted to notice pyo. 

17. Nvpn] with N otiosum : GK. § 231. See on II 17, 28. 

nrn on^ mtryi] nrn cannot belong to niK'y (contrast 18 n^xn), and 
ntn hxh is not Hebrew (Jer. 40, 3 HTn ~13T is corrected in the Qre). 
nn Dn^n must therefore be restored (cf. the Addenda^: after mK'y, n 
might readily have dropped out. Y''\T\=^take it quickly : Gen. 41, 14. 

18. a.nn ''ifin] lit. cuts of milk, i.e. probably (^-ff. iii. 3C91), 
fresh-7nilk cheeses. Luc. rpu^aXtSas, ^^ cheeses ; Vg. ^formellas casei.' 

Dl^tr^ npDn] A variation for the usual tih^\> ''h^ ^NC' [v. 22). 
Another (uncommon) variation is l^nx DvK' nx nN"l Gen. 37, 14. 

npn Dniiy nxi] ' and take their pledge,' i.e. bring back some token 
of their welfare. Of the Versions, LXX (Luc), Targ. Pesh. hit the 
general sense most nearly : koX cto-otVets fiot rr]v dyyeAtaj/ avrutv, n^l 

20. bv] Cf. z'v. 22 {t by). 28; and bv fnj Is. 29, 12 (11 ba). Mic. 
I, 14. — n^jyon (n ^r.) to the round eftclosure (camp : EB. i. 636) : 7JyD 
as 26, 5. 7t. Some edd. read \htfem. form n!?:yDn {^milra'). 

N'kJ'^l] ^?^</ /{/?d'<f z//> (viz. the things mentioned in z'. 17 f. on to the 
asses: cf. D^^Din bv i^K'J, Gen. 31, 17. 42, 26 al.): but the ellipse is 
surprising. Bu. suggests the insertion of V^Ji after ^{t^'''1 (Gen. 29, if) : 
but this seems to suggest a longer and more formal journey than 
one of 12 miles or so. The same objection may be made to Sm.'s 
ys*! (Gen. 20, i al.), which also suggests a journey by stages. 

'V\ NX\n PTini] KV^"1 with the art. must of course be in apposition 
with pipin : as the text stands, therefore, it can only be rendered 'And 
the host that went forth to the battle array — they shouted in the war ' 
("lyini, ace. to Tenses, § 123 a or 129: RV. implies T'^Q for lyini). 
The construction, however, is very strained ; and the fact of the host 
going forth is surely intended to form part of the information given, 
and not to be presupposed. No doubt, therefore, f^if' should be read 
for N^*\"i : 'And he came to the enclosure, atid (^ = as : a circum- 

^ The later Jews interpreted HZliy oddly of a deed of divorce ; see Lagarde, 
p. xvi; cod. 56, Holmes and Parsons (ap. Field) Pi0\iov diroaTaaiov; Jerome, 
Quaestiones, ad loc. ; and Aptow. ZAW. 1909, p. 245. 

XVII. ij-2g 143 

stantial clause) the host was going forth to the battle array, and 
{Tenses, 113. 4 yS ; GK. § 112^) they were shouting in the war.' 

lyin] Read, as elsewhere (e.g. Jud. 15, 14), Win; the verb is yn, 
not yyi. 

21. "I"iyni] Cities and countries, regarded as the viothers of their 
inhabitants, are regularly in Heb. construed with a fern. sg. ; and 
occasionally the name, even when it denotes the people, is construed 
similarly (Ew. § 174^; GK. § 122^, i) : Ex. 12, 33 Dyn ^y onvD ptnni. 
II 8, 2. 5. 6 (in the parallel i Ch. 18, 2. 5. 6 altered to ViT'l, NT1, NT'l). 
24,9 bxili''' '•nni (in I Ch. 21,5 \T1). Is. 7, 2. 21, 2. 42, II. Job I, 15 
Onpni ^1^ ?sm. By poets the principle is carried further : and they 
love to personify the population of a nation or city, as a woman : e. g. 
Is. 54, I ff. ; and in the frequent p''V na, hl1 T\1, etc., fVV nnti'1'' Is. 12, 6 
etc.: cf. Mic. i, 11-13- J^i"' i°> ^7 ^tc. 

23. . . . mm . . . '•\i'ro Xini] A special case of the idiom noticed on 
9, 5 : I Ki. I, 22. 42. Gen. 29, 9 are closely parallel. 

miyOD] An error, already noted in the Qre. LXX, Vulg. Targ. 
agree with the Qre in expressing the pi. DbiysD ; Pesh. has the sing. 
^51^?'?'? ; and one of these must be right. 

24. 1D:''1] -1, as 14, 19b. Gen. 30, 30 {Tenses, § 127 a; GK. § iiih). 

25. DJT'N'nn] See on 10, 24. 

n^y] without subj., as Gen. 32, 7; Is. 33, 5 : Tenses, § 135. 6 (2); 
GK. § 1 1 69. 

^J1 n\"ll] and it shall be, as regards the man, etc.: see on 2, 36. 
For the Hif, 1J"i^y\ see GK. 530; and cf. IpBTI 14, 22. 

26. ^yo] Cf. Jos. 5, 9. I Ki. 2, 31. II 24, 21. 25 {Lex. 7581^). 
si"in '•3] not that he should reproach (^IC)), but that he should have 

reproached (as a completed fact) : \\,. 44, 20 that thou shouldest have 
crushed us in a place of jackals. Gen. 40, 15. v\-\n'' would no doubt 
be more usual (18, 18. Ex. 3, 11: cf. Lex. 472t'f): but are we 
entitled to say (Ehrlich) that the pf. here is ' absolutely un-Hebraic .? ' 
C-'n D\n^N] the plural of ' majesty : ' GK. 132^ 

28. mnn] fN^k• is construed regularly as z. fern. pi. , e.g. 25, 18; 
Jer. 33' 13; Zech. 13, 7. 

•'JN] Note the emph. pronoun: cf. II 7, 8. Jos. 23, 2. 2 Ki. 2, 3. 

29. Nin nm N^n] 'Was it not a word?' i.e. I merely asked a 

144 T^he First Book of Smnuel, 

question : that was all. So Ki. rightly : nnDNl Nin Djns N^n lOmna 

30. "inx hrD ^x] ' to the front of another.' 

nan nyn "inntJ'"'!] lit. /«r«,?(/ him back with (GK. § iivff) a W(?rrf 
= replied to, answered: see on II 3, ii. 

32. DIX 37] LXX, We. "'^IN 3p, which is undoubtedly more pointed, 
and is recommended by the "jnay which follows : cf. z;. 1 1 (which 
immediately precedes in LXX). ' It is the custom, when the king 
is addressed, to say " my lord " in place of what would be the first 
thou ' (We.). 

V^y] as ij/. 42, 5. 6. 7. Not ' within him' (=n"1i?3), which suggests 
an incorrect idea, but ' upon him.' py in this and similar expressions 
is idiomatic : it ' separates the self, as the feeling subject, from the 
soul' (Delitzsch). So t/r. 131, 2 as a weaned child is my soul upon 
vie. 142, 4. Lam. 3, 20. Jon. 2, 8. Jer. 8, 18 MT "'3^ ""^y my heart 
upon me is sick. See Lex. 753^ d; Parallel Psalter, p. 464. 

34. 'y[ n\n nyn] Form of sentence, as 2, iil^ (see note). 

nnnTlSl "•nxn] It is strange that here JIN should be a redundancy, 
while in z'. 36 31"in D3 nsn nx D2 it is rather desiderated before the 
same word for the sake of symmetry. As it is, nxi stands according 
to Ew. § 277"^ end. Lex. 85* 3, to mark a new subj. in a sentence : 
but though several instances occur, they are not mostly in passages 
belonging to the best style, nor can this use of the particle be counted 
an elegancy. Here DS is quite superfluous. It would seem as though 
a copyist's eye had actually interchanged 2nn here with nnn nx in 
V. 36 (so Now.). ^^?1 'and even a bear' (Gratz, Klo. Bu. al.) is 
plausible : but was a bear more dreaded than a lion ? The poet. nriN] 
(Pedes) is not probable. The rendering in GK. § 154^ n. {d) is very 

rw'\ Many edd. read HI, with the note np njj': but the note is not 
a Massoretic one; and in fact nr is no part of the Massoretic Text 
at all, but is simply an error, first occurring in the Rabbinical Bible 
of 1525, edited by Jacob ben Hayyim, and perpetuated in subsequent 
editions. See De Rossi, Variae Lectiones, ad loc, who states that all 
MSS. known to him (184 of Kennicott's, and 64 of his own, besides 
others) read correctly nb'. 

XVII. jo-j8 145 

34*^-35. The series oi perfects with 1, instead of the impff. and 
waw conv., which is the usual narrative tense, is remarkable. A series 
of pff. with waw, in an historical book, has the presumption of being 
designed by the writer in a frequentative sense ; and such is in all 
probability the case here, though, as the accentuation shews, the 
passage was understood otherwise by the punctuators. If the sense 
suggested be adopted, TlP^'ni must, of course, be read "'riblfni (see 
Jer. 6, 17; Am. 4, 7), and Tipinm — though not quite with the same 
absolute necessity^ — ^npTPini. The solitary Dp"'1 is not decisive against 
the interpretation proposed (see Jer. I.e., and on 14, 52). In this 
case, further, as the allusion will be no longer to a single particular 
incident, the art. in nsn and 3nn will be generic (GK. § i26r): 'And 
if a lion or bear came, and took a sheep out of the flock, I would go 
out after him, and smite him, and rescue it from his mouth : and if 
he rose up against me, I would seize hold of his beard, and smite him, 
and slay him^.' (So also Dr. Weir.) 

35. VDo "n^vni] Am. 3, 12. 

vn^pnij 'The dagesh is an indication that VTOHI would be the 
correct form; cf. GK. § 72"' (Bu.). 

37. in "IDN"!] In accordance with Hebrew idiom, though omitted 
in LXX, It is 'a recapitulation of the substance of a preceding 
longer speech, entirely in the manner of popular narrative, and of 
repeated occurrence in Hebrew' (We.): cf. v. 10. 

Nin] resuming the subj. with emph. : Lex. 215^) 2. 

38. ino] \yo\ is used chiefly of the outer garment of a warrior : 

^ On account of the pashta : see Jer. 4, 2 {Tenses, § 104). 

' So LXX in V. 34 orav Tjpxero koll iKaix^avtv : in LXX (Luc.) the impff. are 
continued, as logically they should be, to the end of z'. 35. (On the frequentative 
force of orav, ^viKa dv, lav, ws av, with the impf. indie, and even with the aorist, in 
Hellenistic Greek, see Winer, Grammar of N. T. Greek, § xlii. 5 ; Blass, Gramm. of 
N. T. Greek, § 63. 7; Moulton, Grammar of N. T. Greek, 1906, p. 168 : and comp. 
Gen. 6, 4 [wrongly explained in Winer's note ib. ; see the Hebrew : in 27, 30 for cLy 
ai' Tisch. must be read either ws with codd. AD (so Swete) and 10 cursives, or oaov 
with E and 18 cursives (also Philo) : see Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, 1889, 
p. i63f.; and Brooke-McLean, adloc7\. Ex. 17,11.33, Sf. 34,34. 40, 30, Nu. 21, 9. 
Jud. 6, 3. II 14, 26 (where Lucian, as here, has also consistently the impf. i'crra for 
tarrjaev), etc. ; and Mark 3, 1 1 in the Revised Version.) 

146 The First Book of Samuel, 

vnp, as here, v. 39. 4, 12 Cynp VIOL 18, 4. Jud. 3, 16; On^HP 
(from [nnp or no] ; but see note) II 10, 4= i Ch. 19, 4 ; n?? II 20, 8 
[rd. np]: Lev. 6, 3 (of a priest), i/^. 109, 18 np3 n!?^p ::'3b^i; vnno 
./.. 133, 2 (of Aaron); HP (?) Jud. 5, lot. Cf. EB. i. 1137. 
yaip] So Ez. 23, 24t; V. 5 and elsewhere ^313. 

39. Ehud Jud. 3, 16, for purposes of concealment, girds his sword 
under his D^IO (vno^ nnno). On ^ ?yi? (chiefly late), v. Lex. 759* e. 

Toh^ ^N''l] The words admit of no rendering consistent at once 
with the meaning of i?"'5<"in, and with the following causal clause 
nOJ ^ ""3 : for assayed (AV,), which (as HDJ N^ '•3 shews) must mean 
' endeavoured unsuccessfully,' is not a sense that is ever possessed by 
^''Nin. In Targ. Pesh. the difficulty is felt so strongly that the 
positive clause is transformed into a negative one (7I''ID7 n3X X?1 : 
'^jJLaa.ii. \.s>^ Do)! LXX have ckottiWcv = NjJ*l 'And he wearied 
himself io go (with them),' i.e. he exerted himself in vain to go with 
them, which agrees well with the following clause 'for he had not 
tried them.' Cf. Gen. 19, 11 nnan NVO^ INi'M and they wearied 
themselves to find the door, i. e. exerted themselves in vain to find it. 
The reading N^'»i is accepted by Luzzatto // Profeta Isaia [ed. i. 1855] 
on I, 14 (who states that it was first suggested to him by his pupil 
Abraham Meinster), and Geiger {Urschrift, p. 377); it is adopted 
also (in each case, as it would seem, independently) by We. and 
Dr. Weir. 

nn D"lD''l] LXX D";}P^l. The original text had no doubt simply 
D"1D"'1, which was read by some as a plur., by others as a sing.; by 
some of the latter in was added. 

40. D^33S ''p/Tl] smooth ones of stones ^= smoothest stones : GK. §132". 
Dlp^^ai] either read ^vVj^ (We. Now.), or (Ehrl.) it21pb:3, and 

delete 1^ "IK'N D^y"in 'h'2 , as an explanatory gloss ; or (Sm. Bu. ; cf. 
LXX Tw ovTt avT^ 6ts (rv\Xoyr]v) read £3lpp'p 1^ HNT "it^'N ' his shepherd's 
bag which served him for a (sling-stone) wallet.' 

41. nn^] -i.^n . . . i?')] Contrast 14, 19. Cf II 15, 30*1. 
43. ""aiiN] in pause with zaqef: cf. on i, 15. 

ni^pDl] the plur. is the generic plural. LXX put into David's 
mouth the singularly vapid reply : koX Cart AaveiS, Oi);^i, dXA' •^ -^^f.ipwv 

XVII. 38-54 147 

46. -|J3] collectively, as Ti^nJ Is. 26, 19. But read probably with 
LXX njsi TiJD. 

pNn ^3 lyT'l] pNH construed with a plural, as Gen. 41, 57; and, 
more frequently, in late poetical style, as \\i. 66, i. 96, i. 9. 100, i al. 

^STi:'''!' D^^^^' ^^ '•n] ' that Israel hath a God.' ^'' asserts existence 
with some emphasis; cf. \\i. 58, 12. 

47. yc'in^] The retention of n of the Hif'il, after the preformative 
of the impf., is rare and usually late: Jer. 9, 4; Is. 52, 5; v/^. 28, 7; 
45, 18 ; 116, 6 (as here); Job 13, 9 ; Neh. 11, 17 ; Ez. 46, 22 {Hof. 
ptcp.). These are all the examples of the uncontracted verb that 
occur in Hebrew: cf. the n. pr. ^Din^ once \\;. 81, 6 ; ^Din^ Jer. 37, 3 
(38, I bsV). The form occurs also regularly in Biblical Aramaic, as 
Dan. 7, 18. 24. Comp. GK. § 531; Stade, § 113. 2; Konig, i. 294 f.^ 
But Klo's. nyiJi'Nn for nin'' s?n:^in> (so Bu.) both removes the anomalous 
yc^in^ and yields a better antithesis to what follows ('J1 r\'\r\h ""a). 

48. iTHl] See on i, 12. 

50. ... pj?. 2~'ni] the emph. word before pN: 21, 2^ (see note). 
II 15, 3. Jud. 14, 6 nu pf< nroixoi. 16, 15. 18, 7. 28. 19, i al. 

51. innnoM] See on 14, 13. 

52. N'*:] The "ij in v. 3 was the ravine which separated the op- 
posing forces ; but this could not also be the goal of their flight : 
moreover, if a particular N"!: were meant, the article would be required. 
The word must thus represent some proper name : LXX have na 
(cf. b), which is accepted by both Keil and Commentators generally. 

If Gath was Tell es-Safiyeh, it was about 10 miles W. of Sochoh, down Wady Sant ; 
Ekron was 16 miles NW. of Sochoh : Sha'araim is mentioned in Jos. 15, 36, next to 
Sochoh and 'Azeqah, as a town in the Shephelah, so that it was presumably some 
place down the valley between Sochoh and Tell es-Safiyeh. Its actual site can, 
however, only be conjectured. Tell Zakariya has been suggested : but we must 
first satisfy ourselves that this is not either Sochoh or 'Azeqah (cf. on v. 2). lyi is 
preceded naturally by JD : so C'ly^O 'Hl'!!^ (Sm. Kitt.; Bu. alternatively) is a very 
probable correction for D'''ny!i' T^"!^. 

54. D?5J'1"1''] An obvious anachronism. Jerusalem was still a Jebu- 
site stronghold ; see II 5, 6-9. 

vns<2] Keil (following Th.) : 'an archaism for dwelling, as 4, 10. 

^ So with the art., the non-syncopated form D'CCHQ ^. 36, 6 (except in Dm3) 
is nearly always late: comp. on II 21, 20. 

L 2 

148 The First Book of Samuel, 

13, 2 etc' But priN has (apparently) this sense only in the phrase 
Ivn^i' cy''X, inherited from a time when the nation dwelt actually in 
tents. The meaning can only be that David put the armour in the 
tent occupied by him, when he was on duty with Saul (18, 2-5 etc.) : 
afterwards, the sword at any rate was removed to Nob, and placed 
behind the ephod (21, 10). Ehrl. ?nNZi (i Ki. i, 39). 

55. "IDN , , . niNiai] Not a common type of sentence, in early 
Hebrew. 'It is the tendency of the earlier Hebrew, in the case of 
temporal or causal clauses, which Greek often places early in a 
sentence, either (a) to postpone them somewhat, or {b) to prefix Ti^l : 
it is the later Hebrew, that is apt to introduce them at the beginning. 
Compare ad (a) Gen. 19, 16. 34, 7. 50, 17. Ex. 31, 18. Jud. 8, 3 
with 2 Ch. 12, 7, 15, 8. 20, 20. 24, 25. 26, 16. 19^. 33, 12. 34, 14. 
Dan. 10, 9. II. 15. 19; and ad {b) (D)nii'331 2 Ch. 7, i. 20, 23b 
24, 14. 29, 29. 31, I against some fourteen times in earlier books 
with fl^l prefixed ^' e.g. <:^ 18, i ; i Ki. 8, 54 (\T1 omitted in the 
parallel, 2 Ch. 7, i). 9, i. 

-lyjn nt'^D-p] Not as A V. R V. ' Whose son is this youth ? ' but 
'Whose son is the youth?' nr is enclitic, and belongs to "'D, as Jer. 
49, 19; \l/.. 24, 8 etc. (GK. § 136C; Lex. 261* 4 b). In v. 56 EVV. 
render correctly. 

'3 *n] so always in this expression, and in other oaths not by God 
(nyiQ TI; II 15, 2t; Am. 8, 14): in oaths by God always nin'' ''PI, 
''?? ''D. Either ""H is the st. c. of a subst.''n, an old sing, of the usual C'n 
{Thes., Ke. K5n. ii. 42), = (^) ihe life of . . . / (so the Massorites : of. 
Targ, of i 20, 3 al. *J5^3J \*n'i nin"" Nin D'-Ji^) ; or, in spite of the fern. uSii, 
we should vocalize 15i'D3 "n. The explanation of ''H in GK. § 93** «. 
as a contracted form of the sf. abs. ''H is not natural. 

56. nnx ^NK'] Note both the position and the force of nriN ' Ask 
thou:' Ex. 20, 19 13?oy nnK""l31 speak thou with us; Dt. 5, 24; 
ch. 20, 8 ; 22, 18 nriN no; Jud. 8, 21 in y:S1 nns nip {Tenses, % 202). 

D^jyn] 20, 2 2t. The masc, of which the corresponding fem. is 
T\y^'^ Is. 7, 14 al. For np''1 v. 57, see on 4, 20. 

^ Quoted from a letter of the writer by Prof. Franz Delitzsch in The Hebrew 
New Testament of the British and Foreign Bible Society. A contribution to 
Hebrew Philology. Leipzig, 1883 [written in English], p. 19. 

X VI I. jy—X VIII. s 149 

18, I. 'y^ m^\>:^'\ Gen. 44, 30 vj'Djn nnik^p wtiy\. 
inns'"!] The Kt. is *'2'^^*1 (a rare form: Ew. § 249^; 01. p. 469; 
Kon. i. 224, 621; GK. § 60^: Hos. 8, 3 iSTW \p. 35, 8 inn^n. Jer. 

23, 6 iNip"! ; Qoh. 4, 12 ispn''; Jos. 2, 4 [corrupt]; see also on 21, 14 
and II 14, 6): the Qre substitutes the more usual ^"^i^^*!. 

2. ys^h unj N^] The same idiom as Gen. 20, 6. 31, 7. c>^. 

24, 8 etc.: and Nu, 20, 21. 21, 23 without ?. 

3. nni] as iD^'in'' is the subj. to the end of the verse, Sm. Bu. Now. 
Kit. read irh for 1111. But 'h nn2 m3, with the rarest exceptions 
(2 Ch. 29, 10. Ezr. 10, 3), is used only of a superior, especially a 
conqueror, prescribing terms to an inferior (11, i. Jud. 2, 2. Is. 
55, 3 al.), so that it would seem here to be unsuitable. Unless, there- 
fore, \ (Ehrl.) is the waw of 'concomitance' (Ex. 21, 4 : Lex. 253*; 
above, p. 29), it is better to read in nx for IIII. 

4^. VIDI] = a}id also his (warrior's) garment : cf. on 6, 11. Without 
the usual \o (before iy: Lex. 581^ 5), as Lev. 11, 42. Nu. 8, 4. 

5. P^D'k^i] defines how David fared when he w-ent out : ' And David 
went forth, wherever Saul sent him he prospered' = prospering 
wherever Saul sent him. Jer. 15, 6 ""a^n iins ^nx ncJ'DJ 'Thou didst 
forsake me, thou wentest ever backward ' = going ever backward. 
Comp. Tenses, § 163 with Obs. The impff. have of course a frequenta- 
tive force. 

70d is lo deal wisely with the implied consequence of success : in 
other words, it expresses not success alone, but success as the result 
of wise provision. No single English word expresses the full idea 
conveyed by the Hebrew: hence the margins in RV. here, Jos. i, 8 ; 
Is. 52, 13. Success alone is denoted in Heb. by nvvn. 

The narrative 17, i— 18, 5, precisely as it stands, it appears 
impossible to harmonize with 16, 14-23. The two narratives are in 
fact two parallel, and, taken strictly, incompatible accounts of David's 
introduction to the history. In 16, 14-23 David is of mature age and 
a ' man of war,' on account of his skill with the harp brought into 
Saul's service at the time of the king's mental distress, and quickly 
appointed his armour-bearer {vv. 18. 21). In 17, i — 18, 5 he is 
a shepherd lad, inexperienced in warfare, who first attracts the king's 
attention by his act of heroism against Goliath; and the inquiry 

150 The First Book of Samuel, 

^1> 55-58 comes strangely from one who in 16, 14-23 had not 
merely been told who his father was, but had manifested a marked 
afifection for David, and had been repeatedly waited on by him 
{vv. 21. 23). The inconsistency arises, not, of course, out of the 
double character or office ascribed to David (which is perfectly com- 
patible with historical probability), but out of //le different representation 
of his first introduction to Saul. In LXX (cod. B), 17, 12-31. 41. 50. 
55 — 18, 5 are not recognised. By the omission of these verses the 
elements which conflict with 16, 14—23 are greatly reduced (e.g. 
David is no longer represented as unknown to Saul) ; but they are not 
removed altogether (comp. 17, 33. 38 ff. with 16, 18. 21^). It is 
doubtful therefore whether the text of LXX is here to be preferred to 
MT. : We. (in Bleek's Einleitmig, 1878, p. 216 = Comp. des Hex. u. 
der hist. Bb., 1889, p. 250), Kuenen {Onderzoek'^, 1887, p. 392), Bu. 
Dh. hold that the translators — or, more probably, perhaps the scribe 
of the Heb. MS. used by them- — omitted the verses in question from 
harmonistic motives, without, however, entirely securing the end 
desired ^ On the other hand, W.R.Smith {OTJC} pp. 120 ff., 
431 ff.), Lohr (p. xxxiv), Cornill, Introd. § 17. 6, Stade {EB. iv. 
1276), Sm. Now. Kennedy (p. 121) maintain the superior originality 
of the shorter LXX text. In either case, however, 17, i — 18, 5 will, 

^ And so Kamphausen, Theol. Arbeiten (Elberfeld), vii. ' Bemerkungen zur 
.ilttest. Textkritik,' pp. 16-18. — Dr. Weir views the Hebrew text similarly, though 
accounting in a different manner for the omission in LXX : ' " Whose son is this?" 
In 16, 21 it is said that Saul loved David, and he became his armour-bearer. To 
reconcile the two statements, it has been conjectured {Speaker's Commentary) that 
16, 21 records by anticipation what did not really come to pass till after David's 
victory over Goliath. But how can this be reconciled with 18, 9. 10, and especially 
with 18, 13 ? Or, again (Keil), that the question " Whose son is he ? " has relation 
not to the name, but to the position of David's father (but see v. 58) ; or that Saul's 
madness accounts for his having forgotten David. But all these explanations are 
insufficient. Are the verses wanting in LXX a later interpolation in the Hebrew 
text ? This cannot well be : for an interpolation would not insert anything at 
variance with the narrative interpolated. We seem therefore shut up to the 
conclusion that the verses omitted in the Vat. MS. belong to an independent 
narrative, which was in parts incorporated with the older account, but not in all 
MSS. existing when the LXX translated the book. The Greek translation of the 
added verses [in cod. A] is very exact and must have proceeded from a later period, 
when the Hebrew text was fixed as at present.' 

XVIII. s-9 151 

more or less, have been derived from a different source from 16, 14-23 
(notice how David is introduced in 17, 12 ff. as though his name had 
not been mentioned before), and embodies a different tradition as to 
the manner in which Saul first became acquainted with David. 

18, 6-30. Saul's growing Jealousy of David 
{in continuation 0/16, 23). 

6. ni^ncm (Qre) n''C'^] The two words correspond in form so im- 
perfectly that the text can scarcely be in its original form. The least 
change is to read with Bu. ni^hm (cf. Ex. 15, 20 U'mn i?3 JXVm 
Th'my[ D^ana nnnN; jud. n, 34 ni^noui D^ann insip^ nxr inn n^m; 
21, 21 ni^hsa b^rh rh^^ niji ixi*^ ds). lxx, omitting 6* (see 

p. 155) as far as Tl^^^Sn-nx, express then in T\\r\p7 niSp'inDn nJSVni 
'J1 D'ann h^'yy ny b'yo, which is adopted by Sm. Now. (though 
^NTC'"' ny i?DD should precede nn HNipi?), at least as the text of what is 
regarded by them as the main narrative here (LXX, cod. B). nipnoa 
is obviously the right correction of the Massoretic text, as we have it : 
the question of the relation of the Massoretic text of this verse to the 
LXX is one belonging to 'higher' criticism, which cannot here be 

"I^DH blXty] The order is late : see p. 305 n. 

7. nj'':yni] So Ex. 15, 21 ono xirh iyni. 

nipnC'ron D^'k^^jn] ' the women which made merry.' Illustrate from 
II 6, 5, where David and the Israelites, as they bring the ark up into 
Zion, are described as ^"^ 'JQ^ Q'i?"';?'^ : also Jer. 30, 19 hpi min 
Q'pnC'O; 31, 4 (in the promise of Israel's restoration) ^^sn nyn niy 
CpntJ'O i'lnoa JiXi*^. — On the omission in LXX, see at the end of the 

8. niam] Read with LXX mnmn, to correspond with D'S^Nn (We. 
Bu. Sm. etc.). 

riDI^Dn •]{< 1^ niyi] ' and there is still only the kingdom {sc. to give) 
to him.' The correction h (Klo. al.) is unnecessary. 

9. py] The Qre \yi is right. NnM with the ptcp. expresses at once 
origination and continuance — ' and . . . came into the condition of 
one eyeing:' so Gen. 4, 17 i^'y n:3 ^T1 ; 21, 20^; Jud. 16, 21 

152 The First Book of Samuel, 

|niJ3 \"T'1; 2 Ki. 15, 5. The verb is a denom. from J^J?, 'to eye' (sc. 
enviously : LXX, cod. A vTro/SXeTro/xevos), the ptcp. being perhaps thai 
of Qal, but perhaps also that of Po'el (Ew. § 125^), with the prefix 
D omitted (Stade, § 229; GK. § 55<^'), as sometimes in Pu'al (Ew, 
§ i69<i; GK. § 528). The omission of JD is no doubt irregular: but 
there is a presumption that for the sense in question, the conjugation 
which Ew. (§ 125*) has well characterized by the term 'Conjugation 
of attack ' would be in use. Cf. ]pV to be-tongue, i. e. to slander, 
\p. 101, 4', and GK. § 55^'*'. The verb, however, does not occur 
elsewhere ; and Ehrl. would read NJK' (the N dropped by haplography, 
and ^ then taken as ly). 

10. NDJJT'l] played the prophet, viz. by gestures and demeanour, 
as 10, 5. 

p3D *Tni] ' as (or while) David was playing : ' a circumst. clause. 

IT'i] See on 16, 16. 

DVn DVD] only here. See on 3, 10. UV2 DV itself does not occur 
till the latest Hebrew: Neh. 8, 18. i Ch. 12, 22. 2 Ch. 8, 13. 24, 11. 
30, 21. Ezr. 3, 4. 6, 9 (Aram.)t. 

11. ?0''"l] i.e. cast, from ?1D. But it does not appear that Saul 
actually cast the javelin on this occasion ; hence Th. We. Kp. al. 
following LXX (jipev) and Targ. (nns) would punctuate ?t2*1 and took 
up, from ?t?3, Is. 40, 15. 

"i"'p31 inn n3N] ' I will smite David and the wall,' i. e. I will smite 
them together, I will pin David to the wall: so 19, 10. Cf. Dt. 15, 17. 

12. ^JS^ro] elsewhere, to express the source or cause of an act or 
feeling, mostly late (for the earlier '•JSn) : see Lex. 818^: and cf. 
ch. 8, 18. 

13. I. e. Saul removed him from his circle of immediate attendants, 
and gave him duties with the army. DyD as 14, 17. 

14. 13nT^3^] 'with regard to (7, 7) all his ways.' But IDIT^Da 
is better; so 18 MSS., and many Rabb. quotations ap. Aptow. I. 

1 So "•psirD Job 9, 15 not my Judge, but he that would assail me in judgement, 
i. e. my opponent in judgement. The conjugation is in more regular use in Arabic, 
where its signification is also distinctly seen (Wright, Ar. Gr. i. § 43) : thus A:ls 
to kill, JjlS to try to kill = to fight with : ^J.^;M to outrun, jJjL- to try to outrun 

= to run a race with. 

XVIII. 10-21 153 

15- IC^n] for the usual '•3 {Lex. 83^ 8 a^S). Cf. on 15, 20. 

VJS» nri] aw^ stood in awe (Kp.) of him. A stronger expression 
than N"iM in z;. 12 : Nu. 22, 3. 

16 Niri ""i] Notice the emph. pron. in a causal sentence 

(p. no n.); and also the participles in this verse. 

17. 1^ fnx nnx] Note the emphatic position of nnx. Cf. Jud. 
i4> 3 V np nniN; and see on 15, i. 

^"■' nion^D] 25, 28. Nu. 21, 14 (''"•' non^D nDD)t. 

ICN] ja/<f mentally =^ thought : so z'. 21. 25, 21. 2 Ki. 5, 11, and 
frequently (Z(?jf. 56* 2). 

18. "'D] Punctuate ''JD 'my folk' (Kirkpatrick). The word is the 
same as the Arabic ^ (so We. Keil, etc. ; cf. Thes. 471*), explained 
at length by W. R. Smith in his Kinship and Marriage in Early 
Arabia, pp. 36-40 (^ 41-46), and denoting ' a group of families united 
by blood-ties,' moving and acting together, and forming a unity 
smaller than the tribe, but larger than that of a single family. The 
word is in frequent use in Arabic; but was rare — perhaps only 
dialectical — in Hebrew, and is hence explained here by the gloss 
'3N nnsC'D. The punctuation as a pi. ('my life') shews that the 
meaning of the word had been forgotten. ''D (not no) is used with 
reference to iht persons of whom the ^H consists: cf. 11 7, 18 Tl''^ ''JO, 

Gen. 33, 8 nrn mnton-b 1^ ^jd. 

19. nn] 0/ giving, — though the action is (and, in the present case, 
remains) incomplete: cf. 2 Ki. 2, i. Hos. 7, i. For the omission of 
the suff., sometimes, as here, indefinite, sometimes definite, cf. Gen. 
19, 29. 24, 30. Ex. 13, 21. Jer. 41, 6 ; and GK. § 1 15^ «. 

2 1 . t^'p1?^?] t^'p"l'3 is some kind of /oivling-implement, — certainly 
not a ' snare ' (i. e. a noose ; Germ. Schnur, a ' string'), but probably 
the trigger of a trap with a bait laid upon it (see the illustration in the 
writer's Joel arid Amos, p. 157, and p. 158). Hence it is often used 
metaphorically of that which allures a person to destruction, as here, 
Ex. 23, 33. Dt. 7, 16. 

DTica] The expression recurs Job 33, 14; Ht. with two, i.e. a 
second time (RV.) — not, however, excluding the first, but (as the hteral 
rendering shews) together with it. Hence the phrase, as used here, 
must contain an ironical allusion to David's loss of Merab. Still, the 

154 ^^^ First Book of Samttel, 

expression remains strange. Ehrlich conjectures V''\2'^ ?N PISC' 1t3N">1 
DVn 'h \T\nr\^ D''nc^'[i?D]3 * with the help of the Phihstines {v. 25a) shall 
he make himself to-day my son-in-law.' 

AV. 'with (one of) the twain,' is derived from Rashi, Kimchi, and ultimately 
from the Targ. (piflD NTn3). A rendering which has to supply the most crucial 
word in a sentence, it might have been supposed, could have found no defenders : 
the Jews, however, discover a parallel for it in the OT. — Jud. 12, 7 and he was 
buried nV7jn ^"1S?3 in (one of) the cities of Gilead ! 

23. n7pJn] the inf. abs. construed as a fem., as Jer. 2, 17. The D 
is of course the interrogative. 

n?p3] Cf. Is. 3, 5 where this word is opposed to 1333 (cf. 16, 14. 
Hos. 4, 7. Pr. 3, 35). 

25. "ino] The technical word denoting the price paid, according to 
ancient custom, by the suitor to the father or family of the bridal 
See Gen. 34, 12 ; Ex. 22, 15. 16 (which speaks of the nhn3 "IHD, 
i. e. the sum usually paid for a wife). Cf. the Homeric eSva or ISva, 
II. 16. 178 (of a suitor) iropliv a-n-^peicna cSva ; Od. 2 1. 160-2 "KXkrjv 
hr] TLV eVeiTa K-)^adaZoiv iviriirXuiv Mvacr^w eeSvotcrti' 8t^^ju.£V0S* 17 Sc k 
eTTctTa VrjfjiaiO' o? k€ TrAcicrra iropoi koI {xopa-LpiO'; tXOoi : also as an 
interesting ma/enal pa.ra.\lel, II. 9. 14 1-8 (Nestle, Marginalien^ p. 14). 

"•3] 9 MSS. have DX ""3, the more usual expression; so LXX, 
3 Rabb. authorities ap. Aptowitzer, I; it is also a 'T'3D (on 12, 5). 

26. D"'D\n IN^D sh] Obscure: perhaps (Ke.) alluding to the time 
within which David's exploit was to be performed. The clause is not 
in the LXX. 

27. DTiKt:] LXX nXDj which both agrees with the express state- 
ment, II 3, 14, and also (as We. observes) is alone consistent with the 
following D1Ni'J3''1 (or better, as LXX 2, Aq. Theod. Vulg. DxJ'P!!), 
i. e. completed the tale of them to the king. The change was no doubt 
made for the purpose of magnifying David's exploit. The clause 26^ 
may have been added with the same object : David accomplished in 
shorter time than was fixed more than was required of him. 

^ Comp. W. R. Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, p. 78 (ed. 2, 
1903, p. 96) ; Noldeke, ZDMG. 1886, p. 154. 

2 Cod. A and Luc. : in Cod. B \P'u7 DS<?D''1 is not represented. 

XVIII. 21— XIX. I 155 

28b innn.-IN hs'C' na ^a'^ni] LXX koX -n-as 'lo-pa-qX r^ya-rra avTW 
i. e. iriN anx 7X";b';-^3 ^31 : certainly original. The clause in this 
form states the ground for Saul's greater dread, expressed in z^. 29: 
MT. merely repeats without need what has been said before in its 
proper place, in v. 20. 

29. ciDN''5] Written incorrectly, as from sjOX : so Ex. 5, 7 (GK. § 68^). 

^<1.S'] Read Xi^iJ: cf. Nn; Jos. 22, 25 (Kon. i. 639 f.; GK. § 69"). 

In 1 8, 6-30 there are again considerable omissions in LXX 
(cod. B), the text of LXX reading as follows :— 6^ (And the dancing 
women came forth to meet David out of all the cities of Israel, with 
timbrels, and with joy, etc.). 7. S* (to but thousands). 9. 12* (And Saul 
was afraid of David). 13-16. 20-2 1* (to against htm). 22-26* (to 
son-m-law). 27-29* (reading in 28^ 'and that all Israel loved him '). 
In this instance, it is generally admitted that the LXX text deserves 
the preference above MT. : the sequence of events is clearer; and the 
gradual growth of Saul's enmity towards David — in accordance with 
psychological truth — is distinctly marked, — observe the three stages, 
{a) 12* 'And Saul was afraid of David : ' (b) 15 'he stood in awe of 
him,' and endeavoured indirecdy to get rid of him, 20-21*: {c) 29 
'he was yet more afraid of David,' and (19, i) gave direct orders for 
his murder. The additions in MT. emphasize unduly, and pre- 
maturely, the intensity of Saul's enmity. They also harmonize badly 
with the account of David's betrothal to Michal : if, for instance, he 
had already been betrothed to Merab {vv. 17. 19), it is difficult to 
understand how he could reject as absurd the idea of his becoming 
the king's son-in-law as he does in v. 23 ^ 

19 — 22. David obliged to flee from Saul. He visits Samuel at Ramah 
(19, iS-24), flnds through Jonathan that SauVs enmity is confirmed 
towards him (ch. 20), repairs accordingly first to Ahimelech at 
Nob, then to Achish at Gath (ch. 21), atid finally takes refuge in 
the cave {or stronghold) of'Adullam (ch. 22). 

19, I. T\')2rb . . . 12*1^1] Cf. 2 Ki. 14, 27. 

1 Cotnp. Wellh., in Bleek's Einleittmg (1878), p. 218 (= Die Composition des 
Hexateuchs u. der hist. Biicher"^, 1889, p. 251 f.) ; Stade, Gesch. i. 37-40; Kirk- 
patrick, on i Samuel, p. 242 ; Kamphausen, I.e. pp. 18-23; Kennedy, p. 131. 

156 The First Book of Samuel, 

3. ''JNl] Notice the emph. pron. (twice). 

"in -lanx] 3 = about, as V. 4. Dt. 6, 7. )/r. 87, 3. Respecting another, 
more special sense of '3 "131, see on 25, 39. 

^^ ^m:ni no "'rr'NTl] ' And I shall see somewhat, and I will tell 
thee ' = and if I see aught, I will tell thee : construction like that of 

riDi rax nryi Gen. 44, 22: Tetises, § 149; GK. § 159^. njD = Tt 

(not Tt;), as II 18, 22. 23 ; Pr. 9, 13; 25, 8 al. Comp. Nu. 23, 3»^ 
-^ ''m:^rv\ •'JST-nip inn^, lit. ' and he will shew me the matter of aught, 
and I will tell thee ' = and if he shews me . . . ., I will tell thee. 

4. VK'yD] Sing, not plural, the "i being due to the fact that nc'yo is 
originally ^tJ'yD. Cf. VriB^D Dan. i, 5; T^no Dt. 23, 15; ^jpo Is. 
30, 23 : Ew. § 256^* ; Stade, § 345* ; GK. § 938B. 

5. ':i DK'M] 28, 21 ; Jud. 12, 3 ; Job 13, 14 : cf. f. 1^9, 109. 
JT'ot!?] ' z« slaying : ' cf. 12, 17. 

9. ■•"' nn] LXX DSI^N nn : see on 16, 14. 

asj^r in''23 Nim] The position of the ptcp. as 24, 4. 25, 9. II 11, 11. 
The circumst. clause, as Gen. 18, i. 8. Jud. 3, 20. i Ki. 19, 19, etc. 
{Tenses, § 160; GK. § 141®). 

T'a] Read il^3 (16, 16. 23), noting the following 1, — unless, indeed, 
1^3 were purposely chosen, for the sake of avoiding the assonance 
with the preceding 1T3 (comp. on 26, 23). 

10. Tp^l nn3] Cf. on 18, II. 

IDSM] Only here in the sense of depart, escape. In post-Biblical 
Hebrew, the Nif. occurs frequently (e. g. Foma i, 5), particularly in 
the sense of departing from life : cf. Phil, i, 23 in Delitzsch's Hebrew 
N. T. (published by the British and Foreign Bible Society), where 

'^1??'?? ^^ £is TO avakvaai. 

Nin ni3''i?3] A rare variation for the normal Ninn n^>^3, which should 
probably be restored: Gen. 19, 33. 30, 16. 32, 23t; on this and the 
other passages quoted, Ninn is a *1''3D (on 12, 5). On the words 
themselves. We. remarks, 'As David no doubt fled immediately after 
Saul's attempt, and there is no ground for supposing that this was 
made at night, it is better to connect the definition of time with z^. 1 1, 
where it is required [cf. the following *lp33], and to read with LXX : 
'y\ n^tJ'^1 ^\nT\ nS^b \nn :D^.^n.' So Kp. Klo. Weir, etc. 

XIX. 3-13 157 

II. "Ip31 in^cnS lioti'/'] The messengers, it would seem, were not 
commissioned to kill David (see vv. 14. 15), but only to watch the 
house where he was : hence doubtless "I must be omitted with LXX, 
and the words rendered, ' to watch it (cf. \p. 59, i), that he might slay 
him in the morning.' So Th. We. Klo. etc. 

nolo nriN ino . . . ly^ DS] The use of the ptcp., especially in the 
protasis, is very idiomatic : Tenses, § 137 ; GK. § 159^. Cf. Ex. 8, 17 ; 
9, 2 f. (where, as here, the apodosis also is expressed by a ptcp.). 

13. Q''3inn] See on 15, 23. 

DVyn "1^33] The exact sense is uncertain. '"'"]?? is a sieve; "ispp 
is the coverlet with which Benhadad was smothered by Hazael, 2 Ki. 
8, 15. The phrase appears thus to denote something made of goats'- 
hair in the manner of net- work, — probably a quilt. Ew. Hist. iii. 107 
(E.T. 77) and Keil suggest ^ fly -net (KajvoDTrciov), such as might be 
spread over the face whilst a person was asleep. (The KwvwTretoi/ of 
Judith 10, 21. 13, 9 was, however, suspended on o-rt'Aoi — the posts 
.of the bed.) VHJi'NIO does not define whether the Dnyn TaD was 
placed above or under or round the head : it merely expresses proximity 
to the head, see 26, 7. 

mn] So bnn jos. 2, 15 ; Q^"? 2 Ki. 10, 7. To be explained 
on the analogy of what was said on 1,4, and 6, 8 : the garment, the 
cord, the pots, are each not determined by some antecedent reference 
or allusion, but are fixed in the writer's mind, and defined accordingly 
by the article, by the purpose to which it is, or is to be, put. Comp. Gen, 
50, 26 il'iN^; Ex. 21, 20 J^DU'^ with a rod: Nu. 17, 11 nnnon-riN; 
21, 9 and he put it D2n"7y on a pole: Jud. 4, 18 ri3 W? ; 7, 13 
bn^n to a tent; 20, 16 every one able to sling myC'n"?N pxn with 
a stone at a hair, and not miss it; ch. 9, 9 {^"'N^ a man; 10, 25 
(where see note); 21, 10 nPDC;'!; II 17, 13 ^n^n. 17 nnDD'n a girl; 
23, 21 £33C^a : in compound expressions, Ex. 16, 32 "loyn ^"G-^ Jud. 
6, 38 ^BlI ^^»; ch. 10, I fO{:^n-^a-nx. 25, 38 (see note), etc. The 
principle alluded to on 6, 8 might possibly account for the art. in so?ne 
of the passages cited, but it will not account for all : and a difference 
between Hebrew and English idiom must here be recognised. Comp. 
GK. § i26<i-8. 

158 The First Book of Samuel, 

17. "'jn''D"i n3D no^] The position of 1133 as i Ki. i, 6 : cf. II 13, 4. 
Notice afterwards the emph. ^«"|^ . 

ITT'DN n»b] The use of DD? is thoroughly idiomatic ; and it is by 
no means to be corrected (Th.) after the paraphrase of LXX to N? DN : 
see Gen. 27, 45. 2 Ch. 25, 16 (quoted by Ges. Thes., p. 770). 
II 2, 22 — each time in deprecation : similarly Qoh. 5, 5. Introducing, 
however, as it does, the ground upon which the deprecation rests, 
it is virtually equivalent to lest, and is so rendered by LXX in the 
passages cited (/x?; ttotc, Iva. ^t-rj)^. And in dialectical or late Hebrew, 
as in Aramaic, it actually assumes this meaning, ^ (j) being prefixed 
for the purpose of connecting it more distinctly with the principal 
clause. See, in OT., Cant, i, 7, and (with T^n) Dan. i, 10. In 
Aram, j^jso^? is thus the ordinary word for lest, J2 being not in use^. 
The punct. HOP (instead of the usual '"l^^), on account of the gutt. 
(other than n) : cf. 28, 9. Jud. 15, 10 etc., and before ninj (i.e. ''Jlfr^) 
xp. 10, I etc. See Lex. 554*; GK. § 10211. 

18. n"'"i33] Qre riV33. The origin and meaning of this word, which 
occurs six times in the present context, are alike obscure. 

Miililau-Volck ^ derive it as follows : (_^j in Arabic is to intend, propose , 
conceive a design, make an aim for oneself, hence the subst. (_^rj is not merely 
intention, project, but also the goal of a journey. Upon this basis, M.-V. con- 
jecture that the root may have come to signify to reach the goal of a journey, to 
rest there, bleiben, hestehen ; hence niJ' is? in Hab. 2, 5 shall not abide, and HIJ 
p/ace of rest after a journey (Ort der Niederlassung, spec. fUr den Nomaden), and 
in a different application n^13 divellings, of the Coenobium of the prophets. The 
explanation is in the last degree precarious, the process by which a secondary and 
subordinate sense in Arabic is made the origin of the primary sense in Hebrew 
being an incredible one, and the number of stages — all hypothetical— assumed to 
have been passed through before the age of Samuel being most improbable. All 

1 And so elsewhere in LXX, as Gen. 47, 19 ; Ex. 32, 12 ; Joel 2, 17 (ottiws /xtj) ; 
^. 79, 10 ; 115, 2. 

"^ In OT. n07"*l Ezr. 7, 23, In Phoenician D^ (i.e. D^) by itself has the force 
of lest {CIS. 2 [= Cooke, NSI. 5], 21 QJ^N* DJnjD'' th = ne tradant eos Dei) : 
in Hebrew it is not clear that rtJDP alone has acquired this force, for Qoh. 7, 17. 18. 
Neh. 6, 3 are sentences in which the sense of ivhy? wherefore? appears to be 
distinctly present to the writers. 

^ In the nth ed. of Ges. Handworterbuch (1890). In Buhl's editions (1895- 
1910) of the same work the explanation is not repeated. 

XIX. IJ-2J 159 

that can be said is that, if the text of Hab. 2, 5. ^t. 68, 13 be sound, Hebrew must 
have possessed a verb iTlJ with some such sense as to sit quiet (which does not, 
however, appear in the cognate languages) ; and that mj may perhaps be con- 
nected with it, niJ , however, does not signify ' habitation ' in general, it denotes 
in particular & pastoral abode (see especially II 7, 8), and is only applied figuratively 
to other kinds of abode in poetry Ex. 15, 13, or the higher prose II 15, 25. The 
application is so different that it seems doubtful whether a word closely allied to this 
would have been chosen to denote a residence of prophets. Ewald, Hist. ili. 70 
(E. T. 49 f.), starting from the same root follows a different track, and reaches 
accordingly a different goal. i^^Ij is to intend, propose, direct the mind upon 
a thing; hence — here begins the process of conjecture — to study ('for what is 
study but the direction of the mind upon an object ? '), and the subst. a place 
of study, a college, a school! Again, not merely is a hypothetical change of 
meaning postulated : but a very special sense, unsupported by analogy, and 
unheard of afterwards, is assumed to have been acquired by the word at a 
relatively early period in the history of the Hebrew language. 

The Kt. should probably be pointed 0:1 33 (cf. LXX Iv kvaO ^) with 
the original fern, termination, preserved in many old proper names 
{Tenses, § 181 «.: comp. e.g. nanv, nnn^, rii5^3). The form nM3 is 
rare (nni, n^oy, n"'DS: 01. p. 412). It is just possible (on the ground 
of the masc. niJ) that the word in itself might have signified dwelling 
(although, as Dr. Weir remarks, the absence of the art. is an objection 
to its being supposed to have any such appellative sense here) : more 
probably it is the name of some locality in Ramah, the signification 
of which is lost to us. 

20. 3V3 *ray] 'standing as one appointed over (i Ki. 4, 7. Ruth 
2, 5. 6) them.' Both ptcpp. are represented in LXX, but the com- 
bination is peculiar and suspicious, \^\ ^nb' 26, 7 being not quite 
parallel. Omit prob. loy (Sm.). For XTI read INTI (Versions). 

22. yyt^l "1D*N ^n^n "1"I3 lyj LXX ews rov ^peWos ToC aAco tov Iv tw 
2€<^a = ^DE'3 T^X p.jn nis ny, no doubt rightly. The article in S^J^ 
is irregular (on 6, 18); and a '•SEJ' or bare height (often in Jeremiah) 
is a natural site for a p3 . 

2 2^ -inx''l] sc. nDINH, as 16, 4. The more usual nON''1 is a l^^D 
(cf. 12, 5, with the note). 

23. D:r] LXX IkCS^v = DK'D. So Th. Klo. Weir, Bu. etc. 

1 V having dropped out in transcription; comp. Jud. 16, 4 Iv AXcfuprjx for 7nJ3 
IB'. Am. I, I fv A/cnapeifx for D^lpja. 

i6o The First Book of Samuel, 

Nn:)nn "yhn "i^^l] Irregular : comp. II 1 6, 1 3 h'^\>^^_ T|5n Tj.^n ; and 
with the pf. (as a freq.) 13, 19 * "^^J^Jl 1''^'"' l^ril- Jos. 6, 13a D'^aijn 
nnDlti'2 lypri"! Tjipn. These four are the only irregular cases, The 
normal type would be N3Jnni ^l^n "1P''1 (on 6, 12a'); and this should 
doubtless be restored in each (so Ehrl.) : notice the regular type in 
Jos. 6, 13^^ (yipni "yhn . . . i^in). 

24. D"iy] i.e. as Is. 20, 2. Mic. i, 8 without the upper garment, 
and wearing only the long linen tunic, which was worn next the skin. 
The passage records another explanation of the origin of the proverb 
n"'j;''333 i'lXK' DJn, which refers it to a different occasion from the one 
described in 10, 10 f. 

20, i-io. David entreats Jonathan to let him know if he can dis- 
cover that it is really Saul's purpose to kill him, and suggests to him 
a plan by which he may do this ivv. 5-7). 

1. ^\>yC) ""3] with no subj. expressed : cf. on 17, 25. 

2. n{j>y li?] The Kt. can only be pointed >'^^V IP i. e. ' 1/ my father 
had done . . . ,' which, however, yields a sense unsuited to the context. 
The Qre Nb is therefore to be preferred. As for the verb, nb'y would 
be grammatical {halh not done = doth not do : Tenses, § 12) : but the 
impf., which is expressed by the Versions, is preferable (Am. 3, 7) : 
' My father doth not anything great or small, without revealing it to 
me' (lit. uncovering my ear: 9, 15). 

3. yaB'''l] nil? is no doubt an accidental dittograph of y and T : but 
yncyi seems sufficiently justified by the nirT' TV which follows : David 
strongly protests that there is ground for his suspicion of Saul's 
intentions. There is thus no occasion to follow We. al. in reading 
with LXX {koI a-n-EKpiOrD S^Jl for y3ti'''l : y^^n alone for nai 's l''EJ'n 
(II 3, ii) is found only in poetry, and late Heb. (see on 12, 3). 

D71N1] a strong adversative: but indeed, as Ex. 9, 16 (^Lex. 19^). 

^3] introducing the fact asserted in the oath, as 14, 44 etc. 

JJB'DD] 'the like 0/ a. footstep is, etc' JD is properly an undeveloped 
subst., the like of^\ for instances of a subst. compounded with it 
forming the subj. of a sentence, see Lev. 14, 35 T^'ll v nN"lJ VJJ3. 

Lam. I, 20 nj^3 n:??. 

^ See Lex. 453* ; and especially Fleischer, Kleinere Schriften, i. 2 (1885), 
pp. 376-381. 

XIX. 23-XX. s i6i 

yb'S] only here : the meaning is clear from the Aram. Ns;D''S, 
^>'^a Comp. the cognate verb in Is. 27, 4. 

4. Jonathan offers to test his father's state of mind, in any way 
that David may suggest. 

'V\ "TDND no] lit. 'what doth thy soul say? and I will do it for 
thee : ' = whatsoever thy soul saith, I will do it for thee : similarly 
Est. 5, 3. 6: Tetises, § 62. Cf. on 11, 12. 

Tki'DJ] The K^SJ in Hebrew psychology is the usual seat of the 
emotional impulses : hence "iti'DJ (''K'SJ, "I^TDJ) is used as a pathetic 
periphrasis for the simple pronoun: Gen. 27, 4. 19. 25. 31; Nu. 
23, 10 and Jud. 16, 30 (obliterated in AV., on account of the difference 
in the Hebrew and English conception of the 'soul'); ch. 2, 16 
(comp. note) : in poetry (often in parallelism with the pronoun), 
«A- 3> 3- ii> I- 34, 3- 35, 9', Is. i, 14- 42, i. 55, 2; Jer. 5, 9. 29 ah 
Its use, in a passage like the present, is a mark of grace and 

"IDNn] 'LXX iTriOvjxu., reading perhaps ^^Nri [cf. on 2, 16], which 
is usually the Hebrew of i-n-iOvixiia, or pXK^n, as in Dt. 14, 26, where 
also it is connected with ■JC'DJ . Only here is linO. the translation of 
"ION ' (Dr. Weir). Bu. Sm. Now. all read nixn : cf. II 3, 21. 

5. aK'N 3K^] 'David, as appears from v. 25 ff., was, together with 
Abner and Jonathan, Saul's daily and regular companion at table : 
thus the sentence 'V\ 2^^^ ''33N1 cannot be so related to the preceding 
one, as though the new-moon were the occasion of his being a guest 
at the king's table : on the contrary, the new-moon is rather alleged 
as the excuse for his absence. Consequently, the rendering, " To- 
morrow is new-moon, and I must sit with the king at meat" is 
excluded ; and the only course remaining open is to read with LXX 
2^^ N^J 3^^ " To-morrow is the new-moon, and I will not sit with the 
king at meat ; but thou shalt let me go " etc' (We.). So Lohr, Sm. 
Now. : Bu. dissents. For the new-moon, as a festival and popular 
holiday, see 2 Ki. 4, 23. Am. 8, 5. 

JT'B'PCJn] cannot be construed grammatically with 2"iyn, and is 
omitted by LXX. Targ. '(Or) on the third day.' 'But on the third 
day is always ''^''^^[i D^*? ; and ^''^''^f, when without a noun, is 
always a third part ' (Dr. Weir). Probably the word is a gloss due 

1365 M 

i62 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

to a scribe who observed that in point of fact David remained in 
concealment till the third day {v. 35). 

6. In this verse we have two idiomatic uses of the inf abs. com- 
bined: {a) to emphasize the terms of a condition expressed by DS, 
which has been briefly noticed before (i, 11): add Ex. 15, 26. 19, 5. 
21, 5' 22, 3. II. 12. 16. 22, 23, 22; ch. 12, 25. 14, 30, below vv. 7''. 
9. 21 : ib) at the beginning of a speech, where a slight emphasis is 
often required: so v. 3. Gen. 43, 3. 7. 20. Jud. 9, 8. ch. 10, 16. 
14, 28. 43. 23, 10; II I, 6 ; 20, 18. 

^Nk^j] on the force of the Nif. {asked for himself, asked leave ; so 
Neh. 13, 6), see Ew. § 123^5; Stade, § 167^; GK. § 516. 
n''»^^ nar] as i, 21 : cf. on i, 3. 

7. niOK^ na Dn] See on 14, 9. 

loyo . , . ♦ nnf'3] z'. 9. 25, 17. Est. 7, 7 : /> accomplished {= deter- 
mined) <?/ /^z>?? or (?« his part. Dyo expresses origination ( = Greek 
Trapa with gen.): i Ki. 2, 33. 12, 15. Is. 8, 18. 28, 29. 

8. inay i^y] Everywhere else Dy non ntJ'y, or, occasionally {Lex. 
794^), nx or 7. There occur indeed 7X HDn riDJ Gen, 39, 21, and 
i^y ion nt2J Ezr. 7, 28. 9, 9 : but hv suits as naturally with nU3 as it is 
alien to rW"}). Doubtless, therefore, oy should be restored, which 
is expressed also by LXX, Pesh. Targ. For the ' covenant/ see 
18, 3- 

nriN ^JJT'Dn] For the emphatic position of nnx, cf. on 17, 56. 

"•JX^nn nr no^ T^^* "ly^] ' but to thy father wherefore ghouldest thou 
bring me?' Notice the emphatic position of ']"'3X ny, before the adv. : 
cf. before l) and N?n Jer. 22, 15. Neh. 13, 17. Job 34, 31 ^K ^N '•3 
"U:Nn for unto God did one ever say? before ''3 Gen. 18, 20. i Ki. 
8, 37. Mic. 5, 4. Ez. 14, 9. 13 al.; before ON \p. 66, 18; before TVt2 
Est. I, 15. 9, 12*; before iy i/^. 141, 10. 

9. ^b n7''!'n] in answer to the remark in the previous verse ; so v. 2. 
'y\ DX *3] ' for if I know that the evil is detennined of my father 

to come upon thee, shall I not tell thee that?' X7l as Ex. 8, 22 
(GK. § 150*; cf. on II, 12. 16, 4): but very probably NvH should 
be read (so Bu.). Ke. We. construe affirmatively, assuming an apo- 

XX. 6-13 i63 

siopesis : ' . . . and I do not tell thee that ' {sc. so and so may God 
do to me !) ^ 

'i) nnx ah)] nna is very emphatic : cf. on 15, i (<f) ; and 21, 10. 

10. n^p ym "iJyTlo 1X] ' if perchance (?) thy father answer thee 
with something harsh.' If the text is correct, IN must have here the 
unusual sense of if perchance (RV.). There is no difficulty in the 
indef. njD (19, 3), or in the position of T\^\> in apposition to it at 
the end (see on 26, 18): but i^* means as a rule or or or ?/* (Ex. 
21, 31 al.); and if perchance is so different from or or or if that it is 
very doubtful if it is sufficiently supported by this passage and Lev. 
26, 41. Most probably we should read here DN for no IN, and in 
Lev. TNI for tX'iX (Bu. Sm. Now.). 

11-17. Jonathan renews his promise to let David know, if he finds 
his father's evil intentions towards him confirmed {vv. 12-13. 17). 
In view of David's future accession to the throne, he implores David's 
kindness for himself, or, in case he should not survive, for his children 
(vv. 14-16 : cf. 2 S. 9). It will be noticed that whereas in vv.. i-io 
David entreats the help of Jonathan, the roles are here reversed, and 
Jonathan entreats the favour of David. 

12-13. This difficult passage is best rendered: ' Yahweh, God of 
Israel [be witness] ! when I shall sound my father to-morrow [(or) the 
third (day)], and behold there is good toward David, shall I not (n?1 , 
as 3^. 9, though again N^n would be better) then send unto thee, and 
disclose it to thee ? Yahweh do so to me and more also : if one 
make evil towards thee pleasing to my father ^, I will disclose it to 
thee ' etc. (so RV., the sentence being merely somewhat more closely 
accommodated to English idiom). It is true that commonly a more 
emphatic particle follows ':i ni^'y n3, and that the analogy of other 
passages might have led us to expect 'v\ n?:N '•:3 , , » , 3^13"''' DN ''3 
(II 3, 9) or 'J1 rhy^ . , . . n"'t2'''' O N^ DN (cf. II 19, 14) ; but the types 
of sentences with 'J1 nc'V ns are not perfectly uniform, and there 

1 It is difficult to think that Haupt is right in identifying N? (/«) here with the 
Arabic asseverative particle J {AJSL. xxii, 1906, p. 201, cf. p. 206). 

^ Or, with Klo. (see p. 164, note on SD**^), inserting N''3nb after '•aX, ' if one 
make it pleasing to my father to bring evil upon thee.' 

M 2 

164 The First Book of Samuel, 

seems to be no necessity for such a particle to be used, if the sense is 
sufficiently plain without it. At the beginning, if nw is a vocative, 
it agrees badly with the speech following, in which the second person 
is throughout Jonathan, and in this case "ly has probably fallen out after 
nn (so Pesh. RV.)^ On inD njJD see on 9, 16; and on }m n^:, 
9, 15. Tt^W^^T^ is as perplexing and intrusive as in v. 5, and is no 
doubt, as there, ' a correction ex eventu.' 

njni] lit. and behold, used similarly in the enunciation of a particular 
hypothetical alternative, Dt. 13, 15; 17,4; 19, 18; and in Lev. 
13 — 14 frequently. Comp. above, on 9, 7. 

aD""""] The punctuation {make good or pleasing to) implies as subject 
2"'t3"'Dn (on 16, 4). Perhaps, however, the word ought to be read as 
^a/^D""^ {he pleasittg to), construed with nx as Vl."". II 11, 25, where 
see note (though Klo.'s N''2n7 after 'ax would remove even this 
irregularity). But the Heb. idiom for seem good to is not ^N 3^''^ but 
^}^^ ne*; ; so 3tp^2 after all may be right. 

1 4- 15a. Another difficult passage. 'And wilt thou not, if I am 
still alive [sc. when thou comest to the throne), wilt thou not shew 
toward me the kindness of Yahweh, that I die not ? ' The second 
N71 must be treated as merely resumptive of the first : cf. 13 i Ki. 
20, 31 ; NT^ Gen. 27, 30; ^^^1 Dt. 20, 11. But most moderns prefer 
to point ^}. (II 18, 12) for X^l twice : ' And oh that, if I am still 
alive, oh that thou wouldest shew toward me the kindness of Yahweh ! ' 
(on mtDN N71 see the next note). Resumption, however, of either 
N?^ or '^). would be very unusual (see on 25, 26) ; and what we should 
expect is simply '31 T\mr\ N^q ^n ^jmy DN1. -."1 IDH, as D\n^N non 

n 9, 3- 

nii:N N^] This clause does not in itself cause difficulty : nevertheless 
LXX, Vulg. both render as if it expressed the opposite alternative to 
"•n "'JTiy DN (/cat lav Oavdrw airoOavu), St vero 7nortuus fuero). Accepting 
this view, we must either (Sm.) read HIDK ni» nS for niDX Nb] (though 
K? would be unusual in such a connexion), or (Bu. Nov/.) read 
niJ^N n^iD DN1, supposing xh to have come into the text by some 

1 Ehrlich, however, regards '"• 'X nin^ as an accus. expressing an oath ( f= By 

!) : cf. in the Talm. D'^H^Xn = By God! Hin pSJOH = By the Temple! 

{Randglossen, i. 216). 

XX. i)-i6 T65 

error — niJD DX1, for instance, having dropped out, niCN being con- 
nected with V. 14, and N?1 being needed to complete the sense. 
Render then (connecting with v. 15), 'And, if I should die, thou 
wilt not cut off thy mercy from my house for ever ^' Or, with 
a slighter change in MT., but at the cost of another 'resumption,' we 
might read '21 nnan X^l DIDN niO DX vh\ 'And thou wilt not, if 
I should die, thou wilt not cut off,' etc. But again, what we should 
expect is ':i iiDn nnDD vh niDN nio dni. 

I5l'-i6. 'J1 m:)n3 xh] A third difficult passage. F. 15 will just 
admit of the rendering, ' And thou wilt not cut off thy kindness from 
my house for ever, and not (= yea, not) when Yahweh cuts off the 
enemies of David,' etc. But the repetition of N71 is very awkward ; 
and in v. 16 not merely is the covenant concluded with the house 
of David strange, but clause b is anacoluthic, and what is expected is 
not that Yahweh should require it from the hand of David's enemies, 
but from the hand of David himself, in case he should fail to fulfil the 
conditions of the covenant. LXX points to another and preferable 
reading, uniting 15^ and 16, and treating the whole as a continuation 
of Jonathan's speech in 15* (as rendered in the last note) : kol d fxri, 
Iv Tw i^aipitv Kupcov tovs e;(^povs AafetS CKacrrov aTro irpoa(i)Trov rrj's 
yyj'i, evpeOrjvaL [cod. A i^apOrjvaij to 6vop.a rov 'I(x)va6av diro tov olkov 

Aai'eiS i.e. n-i3^ ^^"^{7] ^JD i?yo c"K iH ^n>N nx mn^ nnann ^16) 
in n^3 Dyo iDJin" Q^ = < And when Yahweh cutteth off the enemies 
of David, each one from the face of the ground, the name of Jonathan 
shall XiOl be cut o^ from the house of David.' The clause 'y\ K'pll, 
which was incongruous in MT., is now in its appropriate place, in 
Jonathan's speech, as a final wish expressed by him on behalf of his 
friend: 'and may Yahweh require [Gen. 31, 39. 43, 9. Jos. 22, 23; 
cf. II 4, 11] it at the hand of David's enemies!' (viz. if they presume 
to attack or calumniate him). The reading is also supported by 
24, 22, where Jonathan says to David, 'Swear to me now by Yahweh 
that thou wilt not cut off my seed after me, nor destroy my name out 

' We.'s n"'^3n \s7 miDX DX Xpl is a form of sentence against analogy. 
2 We. Bu. XpXpl and may not . . . ! (LXX, representing nS by koi ti fj.rj, vocalized 
wrongly N?1 : see below, on II 13, 26; and comp. Jer. 11, 21 LXX). 

i66 The First Book of Samuel, 

of my father's house.' Jonathan, being David's brother-in-law, and 
prescient that David will succeed Saul upon the throne, prays that 
when his enemies are destroyed — especially, in accordance with the 
usual Oriental custom (cf. i Ki. 15, 29. 16, 11. 2 Ki. 10, 6. 11, i), 
the family of his predecessor — his own relationship with David's house 
may not be forgotten or disowned. David's acknowledgement of 
the obligation is recorded II 9, i : cf. 21, 7. The expression mDJ 
.... Dy?0 DB' recurs Ruth 4, 10. 

The passage is very difficult ; and other suggestions have been made about it. 
Thus Smith reads : ' And if (kS), when Yahweh cutteth off the enemies of David, 
etc., the name of Jonathan should be cut off with the house of Satil (so Luc), then 
will [or may] Yahweh require it at the hand of David;'' i. e. should David forget 
the covenant, God will be the avenger. Upon this view ^3''^5 will be a scribe's 
insertion to avoid the imprecation on David (cf. 25,22. II 12, 14). For the constr. of 
nS see Lex. 530, 'h lb, XPv 1 b : it occurs once (Mic. 2, 11) with a pf. and 
tvaiv consec. in the apodosis. But with regard to all these restorations, it must be 
remembered that the separation of either \h\ or Xp"! from its verb by a long 
intervening clause is very un-Hebraic: in ordinary Hebrew we should expect 

either '31 nn3^ (or DS) t<S nnsnn^, or (with n''"Dn3 N^) the resumption 

of nS (or N^l) before JlIB'' (cf. on v. 14-15*; and see more fully on 25, 26 ^ 
Tenses, § 118 «.), though it may be doubted if there are any cases of this quite 
parallel to that oi\h\ (or nS) here or in v. 14-15*. 

17. in ns yn^Ti^ in^irr' sidvi] 'And Jonathan viade David swear 
again.' But this does not agree with the context. ' The impassioned 
entreaties addressed by Jonathan, vv. 14-16, to David might with some 
show of plausibility be termed an adjuration of David : as, however, 
they are entreaties on behalf of himself , they cannot be regarded as any 
special token of his love towards David. It follows that inx in3nN3 
in !y. 17 agrees only with the reading of LXX ^nnb ynE'n!) |nJin> PIDI^I 
" And Jonathan sware to David again," — i. e. repeated the oath of 
V. 13, that he would inform David if his father still meditated evil 
against him, — which also has the advantage of admitting of a strict 
interpretation : for v. 1 2 f. (to which the reference will now be) 
express an actual oath, whereas vv. 14-16 do not properly express 
an adjuration' (We.). With 17b cf. 18, 3^ 

1 Or (Bu. Sm.) nn W (Jer. 38, 16). 

XX. i6-ig 167 

18-23. The sequel to v. 10. Jonathan unfolds to David his plan 
for acquainting him with Saul's intentions towards him. 

19. IND Tin n^hm'] For "nn LXX has iTTLo-Kifri, i.e. "I'pcri, in- 
correctly vocalized for Hi'Sri /kou shalt be 7nissed (so Targ. ^ynnn, 
Pesh. ksj/ )k.i^koo), which agrees as it should do with 1ND greatly, 
and is evidently right. To go down is an idea which, as used here 
{Jud. 19, II is different), would not be qualified by greatly: RV. 
quickly takes an unwarrantable liberty with the Hebrew. 

^J}^ is a denom., to do a thing the third time (i Ki. 18, 34), or, as 
here, 07i the third day'^. Lit. 'and thou shalt act on the third day, 
thou shalt be missed greatly ' = and thou shalt on the third day be 
missed greatly; cf. Is. 29, 4 n^nn pND n!'3C'1 lit. 'and thou shalt 
be humbled, thou shalt speak from the earth ' = and thou shalt speak 
humbly from the earth, the second verb, in each case, defining the 
application of the first. The principle is the same as that which 
underlies the idiom explained on 2, 3 1■12^n 13"in ?N, though as a rule 
the two verbs are in the same tense (GK. § 120S end'^). 

?INn pNn] LXX TO €pyaj8 e/ceivo: cf. V. 4 1, where 333n 7!iXrD is 
rendered a-jro tov dpya/3. Clearly, in both passages, the translators 
found before them the same word, which they did not understand, 
and therefore, as in similar cases (e.g. v. 20 Apixarrapei ; 14, i al. 
Me(T(ra/3), simply transliterated. And in both passages their reading, 
as compared with the present Hebrew text, has the presumption of 
originality in its favour. Here ?TSn is a vox nihil i ; in v. 41 'beside 
the south ' is a position which does not admit of being fixed, and from 
which, therefore, no one can be conceived as arising; at the same 

' Expressions not quite identical, but analogous, are cited by Roed. from Arabic 
in the Thes., p. 1427^. 

^ Better here (by the side of Is. 29, 4) than in § 120'^, where the second verb is 
subordinate to the first {Tenses, § 163 Obs., second paragraph). 

Lagarde {Bildtiiig der A^o/n., p. 212) illustrates the combination of different 
tenses from analogous constructions in other Semitic languages : thus in Arabic 

■ wij ^i.) = he continued looking, i_)«XJ t_>p = he was nearly melting ; 

^aj rjj^ ^ there shall not have been left (Wright, Ar. Gramm. ii. § 10) ; and 
in Ethiopic jB.ffD}tX: Oft°: he is about to come, W^hi fi'i'ttCi it hath finished 
to lie = it is already laid, Mt. 3, 10 (Dillm. Eth. Gr. § 89. 2, Eth. Lex. col. 932 f.). 

1 68 The First Book of Samuel, 

time, there is the presumption that ^JVN was in both passages followed 
by some similar word. Restore, therefore, here (^ ^^<?Ll or) T?n 33"isn 
and in z*. 41 ^nsn 7SND: 1?n has occurred before in 14, i, and is 
expressed here also by Pesh. («©♦) : 3:"i« is a word which (of. 33"i) 
would naturally signify a mound of earlh. 

20. ''JNl] Notice the emphatic pronoun. 

miN . . . ^JNl] LXX nniK \^\'^y,^\ ITi^ni ^%^^,_ ^jni, the claims of 
which are well stated by We. K'.c?'^ will be construed as in v. 19, 
to which Jonathan's promise now forms the counterpart, ' And I on 
the third day will shoot to its side with arrows.' It is true, of course, 
that Jonathan in fact shoots but one arrow, and the boy at once runs 
to fetch it ; but in the first general description of what Jonathan will 
do, the expressions ' shoot with arrows,' ' find the arrows that I shoot ' 
are naturally used. As a nviO, however, must evidently be carried 
out in accordance with the terms arranged, the fact that in v. 35 ff. 
no mention is made of the three arrows of MT. is an indication that 
they were not originally part of v. 20, mv, though omitted in LXX, 
may be retained, but must be pointed nMif (i.e. Hi?, referring to 2J"iNn : 
see on II 21, I ). In MT. njif (not mv, with n loc>, is for ^J^ 
(referring to pxn), the mappiq being omitted, as occasionally happens 
(about 30 times), e.g. Ex. 9, 18; 2 Ki. 8, 6; Is. 23, 17. 18: Ew. 
§ 247d(2); Stade, § 347c; GK. §§ 916 (under '^rdfem.'), 1038. 

h Th^V\ so as to send it for me etc. The reflexive ""P, implying that 
the vh^ is done with reference to the speaker, or for his pleasure, 
cannot be properly reproduced in our idiom. Comp. on II 18, 5. 

21-22. D''Vnn] LXX throughout have the sing., i.e. ''^nri^ an 
unusual form (see on v. 361^), which might readily be changed errone- 
ously into a pi., as in MT. 

21. N^D 1^] Either prefix IJON^ (which is required in prose), or 
(Sm. Ehrl.) read XVO^. 

rtxai 13np] As the text stands, ijnp is addressed to David, the suffix 
relating to the lad : ' Fetch him and come.' We. reading with LXX 
^^nn (sg.) makes I3np the end of the words addressed to the boy, 
'fetch it,' and treats nsni as beginning the apodosis. But though 

» Like the sporadic DS]^, JN-n, DkJ», S^'N") (II 12, i) : GK. §§ f, 23^ 72P. 

XX. 20-2g 169 

>^nn may be right, for the apodosis to be introduced by 1 and the 
imperative is most unusual, if indeed it occurs at all in the OT. ; if, 
therefore, this view of unp be adopted, it will be necessary to read 
either rixni or (Bu. Sm.) HNb, for '"i^^J; the latter is favoured by the 
corresponding ^b in v. 22. With "im (""N, cf. Nu. 20, 19. 

22. "jn^K'] 'will have sent thee away' {sc. in the case supposed). 
The pf. as 14, 10; Lev. 19, 8; II 5, 24 {Tetises, § 17; GK. § 1060). 

23. ... IC'X "I3ini] the casus pendens : GK. § 143*. The refer- 
ence is to David's promise to shew kindness to Jonathan and his 
descendants in the future {vv. 14-16). 

24-34. Jonathan, adopting the plan suggested by David (za-. 5-7), 
discovers what his father's intentions towards him are. 

25. jn^in"' Dp^l] LXX KalTrpoe(f>6aa€v Tov'lwvaOav (Luc. more correctly 
avTov ^IwvaOav), implying Dip'') . Rose up is out of place : the relative 
position of those at the table is described, and Jonathan was in fro7it, 
opposite to Saul : the seat opposite to Abner was vacant. True, CjlE? 
commonly denotes to come or go infroiit; but not perhaps necessarily, 
and the use of the word here would closely resemble that in \\i. 68, 26 
D''")C' !|D'^p the singers were in front. 

26. "linu Tl^s] The only passage in which Tl^n is used to negative 
an adj. (as elsewhere — at least in poetry — hi, e.g. Hos. 7, 8). It 
negatives a subst. once. Is. 14, 6. See Lex. ii6t>. 

liriD N^"''3] LXX oTt ov KeKaOdpL(TTaL = "il^b iO"'^, which relieves 
the tautology of MT. : ' he is not clean ; for he hath not been 
cleansed.' As thus read, the clause will state the ground why Saul 
supposed David to be still "iinD Ti^a. 

27. >i^n cnnn mnotD ^"l^1] Keil: 'And on the morrow of the 
new-moon there was the second (day),' — a fact so patent as hardly 
to be worth recording. Better with LXX (and substantially RV., for 
the word cannot be understood) insert D'i'3 before '•Jt^'n, 'on the 
morrow . . . . , even on the second day.' A slight redundancy of 
expression is not out of harmony with Hebrew style, especially when, 
as here, the ' second day ' will suggest to the reader a repetition of 
the scene described, v. 24 f. On nnnJDD, see GK. § 80' n. 

29. ■'HN "^-niv Nini] Cf. t/^. 87, 5 |V^y r\::)y Nin"i 'and ffe will 
establish it, even the Most High.' The unusual form of expression 

170 The First Book oj Samuel, 

may have been intended to suggest that David had received the 
command from one whom he would not willingly disobey. But it 
does not read naturally. We. Bu. would read i^ni and lo (Gen. 47, 23. 
Ez. 16, 43t; cf. Aram, Nn). For the words quoted LXX express 
"•ns 'h «n. This, or ""nK 'h 'm NHI, is most probable (note 'my 
brethren ' just below). 

'm] in pause for 'm : see GK. § 29^ So n'jnn, but ^l^n. 

30. nnnnn. niy3 p] Commonly rendered ' son of a perverse ^ 
woman {J^W being ptcp. Nif, fem.) in respect of rebelliousness.' The 
expression is, however, peculiar, and excites suspicion. The genitive 
is attached commonly to a descriptive adj. for the purpose of defining 
it (Ew. § 288c ; GK. § i2 8^'y) : thus (a) 2b 12 pure of heart, D-DD "ipJ 
clean of hands ; {b) JTli'V IDN perishing in regard to counsels ; Mki'J 
VSTD forgiven in r^j/^c/ ^ transgression ; (c) ' Dyf3 nip (Pr. 11, 22) a 
woman turned aside in respect <9/"discretion (= turned aside from discre- 
tion); V^P. ''2V (Is. 59, 22) = those turned back from transgression; 
ri'orb'g "'niC' (Mic. 2, 8) = averse from battle. niTip, however, does not 
define H^y?, but repeals the same idea under a different form. Further, 
niTlP, if derived from TiD to rebel, ought by analogy (cf riispp, 
nnb:, nn^y-. 01. § 219*; GK. § 86^) to be pointed nnnp (with 
aspirated 1). On these grounds, Lagarde, in a note on the expression 
[Mittheilungen, i, 1884, p. 236 f.) contends that T\\T\p is not derived 
from Tin, but corresponds to the Syr. lo»i:» discipline (from )?j lo 
discipline) ; and connecting nip with jjji to go astray, leave the right 
path, he renders the phrase ' son of a woman gone astray from 
discipline^ comparing the Arabic expression (Lane, p. 2305^) iJli jJj 
son of a ivoman gone astray, i.e. son of a whore. But though 
Lagarde's argument is philologically just, the distinctively Syriac sense 
which it postulates for DHil^ is not probable ^ 

^ Used (N. B.) in EVV. not in its modern sense, of contrary, but in the etym. 
sense oi perverstis , huarpaiifxivos (Prov. 11, 20 pSiKvyf^a Kvplw BifffTpafiiievai <55oi), 
i.e. (wished, crooked ; of one pursuing crooked and questionable courses (cf. the 
writer's Deuieronomy, on 32, 5, p. 353). 

2 But Lagarde is unquestionably right in maintaining that in my and its deriva- 
tives two roots, distinct in Arabic, have, as in many other cases (see Tenses'^, 
§ 178 (PP- 230-232); and cf. on 15, 29), been confused in Hebrew, viz. (jj^ 
to bend (e.g. in Is. 21, 3 yDtJ'D 'D^iyJ ; f. 38, 7) 5 and J^^ to «rr, go astray 

XX. 2g-}} 171 

The text must be at fault. It is best, with We., to follow LXX 
(ui€ Kopaa-iwv avToixoXovvTwv = niT)to(L') ^^V? R' ^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^ 
the 1 in myj goes, and to read nniisn niJ?3 p san of a rebellious girl, 
i.e. of a girl who has contumaciously rebelled against her master, and 
left him, — in other words, of a runaway slave-girl. We. compares 
Judith 16, 12 vtot Kopaa-Lwv KareKevTrjcrav avTov<;, kol w? Tratoa? avTO/xo- 
XovvTwv iriTpaxTKov avroi's, in the Syriac version )1^>c>a\.x^? ^i 

nna] LXX ixiroxos, i. e. "l?n art a companion of, which agrees with 
the following h (see Pr. 28, 24). "in3 is construed with 1, not with 7. 
' LXX good ' (Dr. Weir). So Bu. Sm. etc. 

31. ni» p] 26, 16. II 12, 5. Cf. the poet, nnicn '':3 (t/^. 79, n. 

102, 2 it) ; and ni» "'B'JN II 19, 29; niD C^N i Ki. 2, 26. 

33. ^^>1] Read probably PiS^, as in 18, ri. 

JT'DH^ . . , NM n^3 ''3] For this use of X^■^ (which is uncommon), 
cf. 2 Ki. 18, 36. Jer. 50, 15. 25. 51, 6. 11. n^3 is, however, else- 

(Qor. 2, 257. 7, 143. 19, 60 and often: especially, as Lagarde abundantly shews, 
opp. to S3.' to go sti-aight, to keep on the right path), which is found in Hiyn 
to act er7-ingly , II 24, 17 al., and in the common subst. jiy im'qultjf, ^pro-peily error. 
The idea expressed by mj? (= (jlc) and its derivatives is thus not that of crooked- 
ness, ' perverseness ' ( = Cpy), but deviation from the light track, error: and this 
sense is still sometimes expressed by the ancient versions: as Is. 19, 14 (though 
here probably wrongly) D"'yiy HP Ti/eC/^a -n-Xav-ficrstos, Jl^.^ )-»0»; Pr- 12,8 
^.^ ^)^j^ Ua^J i-'*^" * = one deficient in understanding, Vulg. vanus et excors 
(as though lit. one gone astray from understanding). The conventional rendering 
of the frequent |iy by words of general import, such as ahiKia, a/^apria, iniqiiitas, 
iniqtdty, tends to conceal from those to whom the Hebrew term is thus familiarly 
represented, the metaphor which originally underlay both py itself, and the cog- 
nate verb. 

1 In Lncian's recension of the LXX there is a second rendering of the phrase in 
question, viz. ywaiKOTpa<pTJ, i. e. (as it seems) woman-nourished, effeminate. Symm. 

has a.T!aihixnmv dnoaTaTowrajv, Theod ftfTaKifov/xtpajv. Vulg. substitutes 

another disparaging comparison, based upon an old Jewish Haggadah (see Rashi; 
and Aptow. ZAW. 1909, p. 245), Fili m\i\\tT\s virnm nltro rapientis, which seems 
to stand in some relation to the first part of the paraphrase of Chrysostom (X. 301 D, 
quoted by Field), as the second does to the rendering of Lucian : v\\ iropviSiwv 
eiTifiaivoixevoov avSpdcriv, fiTiTpexovTcov rots Trapiovaiv, eKvevfvpianeve kui fiaKaKf Kai 
fMTiSiv ex^^ dvSpos. — Pesh. )lo»tJ« 1 ; -«''- ;^ (comp. the rendering of Pr. 12, 8 
cited in the last note : hardly n"nyj). 

172 77?^ First Book of Samuel, 

where confined to poetry, and expresses the idea of consumption, 
destruction (usually with r\m, as Is, 10, 23), not that of complete 
determination. nnfjD (LXX, We. etc.) for N^^ n^3 is certainly a more 
idiomatic expression (cf. vv, 7. 9), and is to be preferred. 

34. \rhz'r\ Dyo] Cf. 2, 33 {Lex. 769^). 

35-39. Jonathan acquaints David with Saul's intentions. 

36. . . . 1 |*"l "lyjn] See on 9, 5. For the idiomatic fut. instans, 
miD, cf. 10, 8. 24, 5. I Ki. 2, 2 ; and on 3, 11. 

^i-n.n] So 37 bis, 38 Kt., 21 f. (LXX), and 2 Ki. 9, 24 MT. Probably 
a genuine alternative form of J'n (Ew. § i86e). Though the pi. in 
Hebrew is Q''5fn, the form in Arabic (spii.) and the plural in Eth. 
(Srh*?; }i^^\ Dillm. col. 134) shew that there is a parallel form, 
the root of which is a r\"h verb. 

38. ntrin nnnio] mno before the verb which it qualifies, as 2 Ki. 
I, 1 1 mn mnn, i/'. 31, 3 ^'h''^r\ mno; and (for the sake of the rhythm) 
37, 2. Is. 58, 8. Ehrlich's note is arbitrary. 

N2^"i] LXX, Pesh. Vulg. t<?'1, which is preferable. 

40-42. The final parting between Jonathan and David. 

40. 'b ncx] 17, 40. 21, 8. 24, 5. 25, 7. II 3, 8. I Ki. I, 8. 33. 49. 
4, 2. 10, 28. 15, 20. 22, 31. 2 Ki. II, 10. 16, 13b. Not always 
with a compound QyiT^vts?>\on. Cf. GK. § 129^^. 

41. 3J3n Wxtt] See on v. 19. 

^^Ijn *in ^y] There seems no occasion to alter this; and '''jj^n IV 
(with the inf. abs.) is unparalleled Hebrew. 

42. "WV^A = z« that, forasmuch as, Gen. 30, 18 etc. : cf. on 15, 15. 
uyntJ'j] Though an oath is not expressly mentioned, an agreement 

such as that of vv. 14-16 would be naturally sealed with one (cf. 
24, 22). For '31 "yovb, see v. 23. 

21, 2. nnb] So 22, 9: cf. n^n"! Ez. 25, 13; also the anomalous 
punctuation H-^ in the imper. nj?"! Pr. 24, 14, and i and 3 pers. 
impf. ch. 28, 15 nK■lp^?^ (but see note), and xp. 20, 4 ™.fT. See GK. 
§ 90' {efid); Ew. § 2i6c; Stade, § 132. 

Nob, as Is. 10, 32 shews, was a place between 'Anathoth (now 'Anata, 2| miles 
NE. of Jerusalem) and Jerusalem, whence the Temple hill could be seen ; perhaps 
a spot on the Rds el-Meshdrif, i mile N. of Jerusalem, a ridge from the brow of 
which (2685 ft.) the pilgrim along the north road still catches his first view of the 
holy city (2593 ft.). See Nob in DB. 

XX. 34-XXL 4 173 

"I^DTlx] 'LXX A^eifieXe^, as also in ck. 22. 23, 6. 26, 6. i/^. 52, i : 
on the contrary, A^eifjieXex 30, 7. II 8, 17. The same mistranscrip- 
tion occurs in i Ch. 18, 16 MT., where LXX has rightly A;^€t/AeA€x,' 
We. (the readings of LXX as given by Swete). 

nsnp^ . . . Tin"'')] as 16, 4. 

"im ps K'\^J1] Cf. Gen. 40, 8 ink px IJp. Jud. 13, 9. 16, 15 
'm px ^njjl (but Nu. 20, 5 : n'\n^b px Q>rp\ [p. 71]). See Lex. 34b /<?/>. 

3. yT ijX t^''N] The same expression, Jer. 36, 19. 38, 24. naiND 
aj regards anything = at all. 

Tiyiv] Po'el from yT, according to Ew. § 125a', *to make a person 
know a thing in order to determine him to act accordingly' = /o direct. 
But this explanation requires more to be supplied than is probable. 
LXX SLaixefxaprvprjfjiaL, which points to a reading '"niyi'', Po'el from 
"lyj (see p. 77 hottoni), in Qal to designate or appoint (a place, 
II 20, 5 ; a person, Ex. 21, 8. 9): hence in Po'el with a sense in 
which it is difficult to perceive the characteristic force of the 3rd 
Arabic conjugation (Wright, Arab. Gr. i. § 43 : comp. above, p. 152 «.), 
but which is at least that of the corresponding form (from ic^ to 
promise) in Arabic, as -iXsXi Arnold, Chrestom. Arab., p. 197, 10; 
Qor. 7, 138; 20, 82 ^^^..j"^! ■ JaJl u-»J^- ^J^-Vcl.j and we appointed 
you to the right side of the mountain. So here, 'the young men I have 
appointed to the place of such and such a one.' The Hif Tiyin is used 
in a similar, but specially y^r^«i-/<r, sense Jer. 49, 19 = 50, 44 ; Job 9, 19. 
Dr. Weir however writes: 'Is it not rather ^n^y^.? comp. Jer. 47, 7 
nny^ Dsi' D'n Piin 7N,' The Qal would certainly seem to express all 
that is required. 

''JrD^N ""J^S] So Ru. 4, it: in Dan. 8, 13 "JC^a — the one example 
of a real contraction which the Hebrew language affords, ^!,5li 
(Qor. 25, 30) and ^iCs are used in the same sense, perhaps derived 
from the root of '173, and meaning properly a separate, particular 
one. "'307N perhaps signifies one whose name is withheld (from D7X 
to be dumb). Ew. § io6c renders, ' ein gewisser verschwiegener.' 

4. 'y\ no nnyi] Keil, RV. and others : ' And now what is under 
thine hand ? Five loaves of bread give into my hand, or whatsoever 
there is present.' But this leaves the emphatic position of nrh TWon 

174 "^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

unaccounted for : and how could David ask specifically for five loaves, 
when his previous words had just implied that he did not know 
whether Ahimelech possessed them ? Read, with LXX (A, Luc.) 
€1 ctViv (in B the first d has dropped out), DN for rro (' And now, 
?/" there are under thy hand five loaves of bread, give them into my 
hand, or whatsoever there is present ') ; or else (Ehrlich), rinn K'*"'^P 
'31 n^3 njn nrb ^\ DN ^^\ x^f^jn lit. thai which is found, i.e. that 
which is here present, as 13, 16. Gen. 19, 15. Jud. 20, 48. An 
idiomatic use of the Nf. of NVD . 

5. ''T' nnn PN] The use of ijK here is destitute of analogy. In 
Jer. 3, 6. Zech. 3, 10. Ez. 10, 2 nnn ?X of course expresses motion 
under. Here it is simply a corrupt repetition of 7n. 

K''' C'Tp Dn^] The position of C" after tJ'lp nrb is partly for variety 
(after the preceding clause with px), partly for emphasis : comp. 
Is. 43, 8 ^\ ^\TV^•, and P^!! similarly, Lev. 26, 37. Mic. 7, 2 IB'^l 
pN' Dixn. Pr. 17, 16, 25, 14 (of. Gen. 2, 5. Is. 37, 3 al.). 

6. DX ^3] apparently, as Jud. 15, 7, with the force of an oath: see 
Ges. .r. z'. who renders hercle. 

HK^n] a good example of a sing, term used collectively. For other 
rather noticeable instances see Gen. 30, 37 ^pD (note the following 
\r\l). Jud. 19, 12 Ty (followed by ^}\}^. 21, 16 (nJi'N as here). Jer. 
4, 29b -iiy (note jna). Cf. GK. § 123b. Also in ^JNIkT^ CJ'''N, etc. 
(14, 24, and often); and with certain numerals (as t^X D''K'i'E'), 
GK. § 134^-^ 

13P"mvy] kept away (viz. by a religious tahoo, on account of war 
being a sacred work) in reference to us, i. e. (Anglice) frorti us : cf. ? 
construed with verbs of removing or withholding in \\/. 40, 11; 84, 12 ; 
Job 12, 20; and in the Syr. ^ »_». War was regarded as sacred; 
and the prohibition of women to men engaged in it is wide-spread 
{DB. iv. 827b; W. R. Smith, Rel. Sem? 455). 

'jl Xlv7^ hyC:T\'2\ ' as heretofore (i. e. on previous occasions), when 
I have gone forth (viz. on a military expedition), so that the gear 
(clothes, arms, etc.) of the young men is holy, even though it is 
a common (i, e. not a sacred) journey ; how much more so \Lex. 
f|X 2], when to-day they will be consecrated with (their) gear } ' — 
a distinction being drawn between expeditions of an ordinary kind, 

XXL 3-S 175 

and campaigns opened by consecration of warriors (cf. the Heb. 
expression to ' consecrate ' war, and warriors : Mic. 3, 5. Jer. 6, 4. 
22, 7. 51, 27. 28. Is. 13, 3. Joel 4, 9), and David hinting that his 
present excursion is of the latter kind, and that the ceremony of 
consecration will take place as soon as he joins his men (so 
W. R. Smith, Rel. Sem? 456 ; Now.), ti'^^ h'CT\'2 always means 
as heretofore (e.g. Gen. 31, 2. 5. Ex. 5, 7), not (as EVV.) 'about 
these three days ; ' and for the rend, here adopted (which places the 
greater break at 'gone forth'), we must move the zdqef qdton from 
DK'^t^ to •'nx^in. Read also iK'lp"' (LXX, Pesh. We. al.) for y>np\ 
Kennedy, however, renders the last clause, ' how much more to-day 
will they be consecrated with (iheir) gear ? ' (viz. by the consecrated 
bread being put into their wallets, and so, according to ancient ideas 
(Lev. 6, 27 [for be read become\ Ez. 44, 19; see DB. ii. 395), 
conveying the contagion of ' holiness ' to them) : Lex. '•3 e|x 3. 

7. D''32n on?] Presence-bread, i. e. bread set out in Yahweh's pre- 
sence, and designed originally as His food. See the writer's note on 
Ex. 25, 30; and DB. s.v. Shewbread. 

DnD1?2n] The plur. might be explained as a reference to the 
separate loaves (cf. DH? nt^cn , mc^"!?) : but this does not accord well 
with inp/H at the end of the verse. It is better, therefore, either to 
read there 0^1??^ with LXX, or to suppose that the final D in DHDirD 
has arisen by error from the first D of the word following, and for 
"'iE^DDIDIt^n (cf. on I, 24) to restore '•JS^O "iDirsn. Comp. Jer, 29, 9 
(read D^prh) ; 36, 21 (rd. 7y, in accordance with idiom); Jos. 10, 21 
(t^'^N); 2 Ch. 28, 23 (rd. D'lfy); Hab. i, 16 f. (rd. sna) ; Job 27, 13 
(rd. ?^!^.). See further instances in ZAW. 1886, 21 1-2 13 (some 
doubtful). On the other hand, sometimes a repeated letter has 
dropped out, as ch. 17, 17. II 3, 22. Is. 45, 11 (read WNC'n with 
Hitzig, Weir, Cheyne, al.), Dt. 15, 14 (p. 133 «.) ; and probably i/^. 42, 2 
(n^''i^), 45, 7 (D^n^ND INDD: Edghill, Evid. Value of Prophecy, 252). 

8. "i^'yi] i. e., probably, deiaiyied in the precincts of the sanctuary, 
and precluded from entering it, by some ceremonial impurity. Comp. 
Jer. 36, 5 mn'' n''3 sn^ ^3is x^ mvy ^3S* ; Neh. 6, 10. 

D^ynn T2s] 'i''?^ is not chief (RV.), but mighty, which, however, 
does not well agree with D''yin, 7nighi or heroism being hardly a 

176 The First Book of Satnuel, 

quality which in a shepherd would be singled out for distinction. 
Read, with Gratz, ^'''41\} for D''j;'in, 'the mightiest of Saul's runners' 
or royal escort (so Now.) : Saul's Cif"} are mentioned afterwards, 
22, 17. In a runner, strength and size, such as "i''2N — elsewhere, it is 
true, only used in poetry — connotes, would be a qualification which 
the narrator might naturally remark upon, 

LXX has vijxwv rois fjfuovov^ 'S.aovX, whence Lagarde {Bildung der Nomina, 
p. 45 «.) would restore D'''l''yn ?''3N manager of Saul's young asses (Jud. 10, 4. 
12, 14) : cf. b''liX, the name of an Ishmaelite, the overseer of David's camels 
(D vOjn py) I Ch. 27, 30. ^Ibil in Arabic is a herd of camels, 'abila (denom.) is to 
be skilled in managing camels, and ^abil (adj.) is skilled in the management of 
camels ; hence b"'3i<, more generally, manager (of animals). The suggestion is 
ingenious : but the strong Arabism is hardly probable : and the n. pr. b^31N is not 
Hebrew, but Ishmaelite. 

9- ^.1 P':^!] The combination ^\ PX occurs x]/. 135, 17; hence PX 
here is commonly regarded as an anomalous punctuation for pX ; 
cf. nVy Gen. 49, II. in^E' is. lo, 17. niJ^V Pr. 8, 28 (for what, 
by analogy, would be nn^j;, in^K', niJ^y : Ko. ii. 483 ; GK. § 93^). So 
Kimchi, Ges. Ew. § 213^, 286^1; Stade, § 194^(2). Delitzsch, how- 
ever (on \p. I. c), treats PN as equivalent to the Aram. pN num P T^ 
occurs in the Palestinian Targums = if {ij/. 7, 4. 5 etc.), also = l] in 
indirect questions, and = DN, where the answer No is expected, 
Job 6, 12 '•^••n K-inx T'1 i<^^n pN. 10, 4^ 5^ II, 7^ 13, ^^•. and 
JT-N PX (= Heb. ^), DN) occurs (e. g.) simply = if there is . . . i/^. 7, 4^ 
Job 33, 23a. 32a; Job 6, 6b ^31 Dyt2 rT'N px or is there taste in the 
white of an egg? in an indirect question, if/. 14, 2 n'^H fN '''anch 
b'':i\yD. Lam. I, 12, But though the punctuators may have thought of 
this, or (Ko. ZAW. 1898, 242 f.) of the 'in underlying the later W, 
such a pronounced Aramaism is not probable in an early narrative, 
clearly of Judaic origin; and it is better to read simply D5<], — D5<' 
having the same interrog. force as in Gen. 38, 17. W and where . . .? 
(Klo. Sm.) is not probable. Ehrl. v^NI and perhaps. 

pnj] only here. \Ja^ is stated to mean institit ursitque rogando; 
%o possibly pnj may have rae?ix\\. pressed on. But the root is a doubtful 
one in Heb. ; and perhaps pi^^J urged on, from P^X to urge (Ex. 5, 13), 
should be read. 

XXI. 8-14 177 

10. nt:i^] Is. 25, 7. I Ki. 19, 13 in")"=iN2 vjs oVji; 11 19, 5 ^xbt. 
np l^-npn nnx-QN] if thou wilt take that for thyself, take it. Cf. 

for the position of ^T}^, Ex. 21, 8 Qre lb (opp. to M:b, v. 7), and 
p. 35; also on 15, I. 

npj Elsewhere always pointed nn. 

11. nj] See on 6, 17. 

12. po] an anachronism, generally explained now as is done by 
Bu. Sm. Dh. Kenn. Ehrlich, however, would read nap (18, 27). 

14. 1DyD"nN 13B>^l] 'And he changed it, (even) his understanding 
(25, 33).' The anticipation of the object of a verb by a sufRx is 
common in Aramaic; but, though cases occur sporadically in Heb., 
it is not a genuine Heb. idiom ; and while there are no doubt instances 
in which for distinctness the original writers explained the suff. by the 
addition of the object, there are others in which the combination 
is open to the suspicion of being due to a faulty or glossed text, or, in 
late Heb., to Aramaic influence. 

Comp. Ex. 2, 6 nb''n"nK inxini and she saw kirn, the child, 35, 5 (P) 

'"> ncnn nx hni^d^ (?rd. s^n^), Lev. 13, 57'' yjan n t^n nx iJEntJTi ij'xn, 

1 Ki. 19, 21 -ib'ziri dS^3 (lxx om. iB'an). 21, isnnrns . . , . iniy^i, 

2 Ki. 16, 15 Kt. Is. 29, 23 (render, with Hitzig, 'when his children see it, the work 
of my hands,' etc. ; but many regard in!?'' as a gloss). Jer. 9, 14 Di?^3KrD ""jan 

njyb mn ry^T] nx (lxx om, rr\n nyn ns). Ez. 3, 21 (read mmn). 44, 7 
waTix "hhrh (om. "tx'I nx with lxx). Pr. 5, 22. ip. 83, 12 icanj yoiy^ 

' make them, (even) their nobles,' etc. ^. Here the emphatic anticipation of an 
object such as 1Dyt3 is not probable, and the form of the suffix — rare even in strong 
verbs (see on i8, i)— is found only once besides with a verb T\"7, II 14, 6, where 
there are independent grounds for questioning its correctness. No doubt IDK'^1 
is an error of transcription for HSK'^I. So 01. p. 547 ; Stade, § 143^; Kon. i, 546. 

^ Comp. Ew. § 309*'; GK. § 131™. ». There are also other types, as Jer. 48, 44 

cmpD njc' nsio !5N n^!?N n'3n -a. 51, 56 m>,B> ^-yi ^ n^by w ''3 (so often 

in Syr., as II ii, 3. 12, 5 Pesh. ; comp. above, on 5, 3 ; and with ti.e suffix in the 
genitive, as Ez. 10, 3. 42, 14. Job 29, 3 (GK. § 131°) ; and in Ch., in a form 
recalling strongly Syriac usage, i Ch. 5, 26 6 DPJ^I. 23, 6. 2 Ch. 2.;, 10. 28, 15. 
For the Mishnic usage, see Segal, Mihtaic Hebrew, p. 82 ff. Only with one word, 
the interrog. ^N, does the apparent pleonasm appear to be idiomatic: Is. 19, 12 
"T'DDH XIEN 0"^ Where are they, then, thy wise men? 2 Ki. 10, 13 DDH "]!?D "["N 

':i nanx -^rss (in the y, is. 37, 13 n^x). Mic. 7, 10 -^rh^ mn^ vn. 


178 - The First Book of Samuel, 

Dn'^Jiyn] Read DrT'^y^ : 'd ''J"'y3, as Ehrlich rightly observes, is used 
always idiomatically to denote in the opinion o/{so even Pr, i, 17). 

^iriTT'l] and he behaved himself madly. The word recurs, applied 
metaphorically, Nah. 2, 5. Jer. 25, 16. 51, 7. 

D'T'3] in their hands, i. e. as they sought to restrain him (Th. Ke.). 

"•^11] Pi'el from nW, with anomalous qamez, for IH^I^ i.e. scratched, 
made meaningless marks. But LXX cTv/tTravt^ev i.e. ^I^Jl and he 
drummed on the doors of the gates, — ' a more suitable gesture for a 
raving madman ' (Kp.). So moderns generally: cf. GK. § 75'^''. 

16. 'y\ *lDn] 'Am I in lack of mad men?' — The question is indi- 
cated by the tone of the voice : see GK. § 150^. Cf. on 11, 12 ; and 
22, 7. 15. 

nrriN] See on 10, 27. 

•hv] lit. upon me, i. e. to my trouble : Gen. 48, 7 "hv ^m nno. 

22, I. D^ny myo] So II 23, 13 = i Ch. n, i5t. It is remark- 
able that the trs^t:^ is afterwards, both here, vv. 4. 5, and in the other 
passage, II 23, 14 = i Ch. 11, 16, spoken of as a mi5fO. Can a myo 
be also termed a mi^O ? A miVD is a mountain-stronghold {^. 18, 3) ; 
and in Jud. 6, 2. Ez. 33, 27 nnyo and at least nilifa (Is. 33, 16) are 
named side by side as different kinds of hiding-place. We. answers 
the above question in the negative ; and believes that both here and 
in II 23, 13 = I Ch. II, 15 oijiy nny» is an old error for D^ny mVD 
the stronghold of 'Adullam (so Bu. Now. Sm. Kitt. Kennedy \ Buhl, 
Geogr. 97, Ehrlich). 

'Adullam is mentioned in Jos. 15, 35, next before Sochoh and 'Azekah, among 
the cities of the Shephelah. This at once shews that it cannot be Khareitun, about 
4 miles SE. of Bethlehem, with which, since the twelfth century, tradition has iden- 
tified it. Clermont-Ganneau identified it in 1871 with 'Id el-miyeh, 2| miles SE. 
of esh-Shuweikeh (see on 17, i), supposing the ancient name to have been trans- 
formed by a popular etymology into one of similar sound, significant in the 
vernacular {PEQS. 1877, p. 177). 'Id el-miyeh is ' a steep hill, on which are ruins 
of indeterminate date, with an ancient well at the foot, and, near the top, caves of 
moderate size' {EB. s.v.). The site is suitable, but not certain {H.G. 229 f.). 

As regards the meaning of '/ft/wZ/aw, Lagarde {Bildung der Nomina, 54) derives 
it plausibly from U^ to turn aside (^. 119, 157 ; Lane, p. 1973), with the formative 

* ' The expression cave of Adullam, which has passed into a proverb among us, 
is due to a corruption of the similar Heb. word for " stronghold " in v. 4 ' {Century 
Bible, ad loc). 

XXL 14—XXIL s 179 

affix D (01. § 216*: Stade, § 293; Earth, Nominalbildung, 352 f.; cf. GK. 
§ 85*), found frequently in proper names (Dyp3 CltO, &c.), so that the word 
would signify originally a retreat. Heb. proper names have in many cases pre- 
served roots not otherwise found in the OT. 

niM] 'Adullam being in the Shephelah, and David's brethren, 
presumably, on the high ground of Bethlehem (2550 ft.), 12 miles to 
the ENE. So Gen. 38, i. II 23, 13. 

2. XB^j I^J-nK^N K'''N"ba] Cf. Is. 24, 2 n Ntr: -iK^ND 'as (one) who has 
a lender (creditor).' 

ti'SJ *1D] Jud. 18, 25; cf. Job 3, 20; and on i, 10. 

3. 2N10 ns^D] There are several places in Palestine, both E. and 
W. of Jordan, called HSifan, or nSifSn, 'the outlook-point ;' and the 
situation of this one is not known. 

D3nx . . 4 NX''] If the text be sound, these words can only be 
rendered * come forth (to be) with you.' But the case is not one in 
which such a strongly-marked pregnant construction would be expected. 
LXX yiveV^wcrai', Pesh. ofco, Vg. maneat. Read probably, not 3??'.''. 
(Bu. al.), but ^\ (Ehrl,), which is closer to NX'', and is used specifically 
of being left behind \x\ a place, Gen. 33, 15. Ex. 10, 24. For D3nx 
LXX has Trapo. (Tol = '^'^^ ; so Sm. Bu. (cf v, 4^). 

4. ^D?!!] ' led them (so as to be) in the presence of the king of 
Moab.' Another pregnant construction, hardly less expected than the 
last. ""33 DN is not used in conjunction with verbs of motion; and in 
Pr. 18, 16 13n3: h'h'^^ ""JDh the prep, is different. Targ. p^nt^'NI, 
Pesh. >a.:^A.o point to the punctuation Dna^l (see Jos. 6, 23 Targ. ; 
II 16, 21 Pesh.) and he left them, which is altogether to be preferred. 
(LXX KoX TrapcKaXecre ^ ^D?^..) 

mi!iK)2] i. e. the 'hold' of 'Adullam: see on v. r. 

5. mi^fm] Pesh. nsxen (cf. v. 3), which, as the ' hold ' was in the 
land of Judah, seems to be correct. 

mn] The site of Hereth is not known. LXX has iv noXei "XapuK. Conder's 
Kharas, a village on a wooded mountain, 4 miles SE. of 'Id el-miyeh ( Te7it Work, 
243), does not agree phonetically. The suggestion that niH is an Aramaism for 
CJ'Yn wood is very precarious: in Targ. Nli'lin corresponds to U'lH (14, 27 al.) ; 
and the rare Nra"in (Levy, ChWB. 286^) does not mean ' wood.' 

l^-nsai] The reflexive h {Lex. 515b bottom; GK. § 11 93). Cf. 

K 2 

i8o The First Book of Samuel, 

"^ rfiDl I Ki. 17, 3 ; and often in the imper., as Dt. i, 7 D3^ lyo. 
40. 2, 13 D3^ nay. 5, 27 na^ m^j*: Is. 40, 9 "^ "ht. 

6. yiu] known = discovered: cf. Ex. 2, 14. Jud. 16, 9. II 17, 19. 
D"'tt'JSl] Read with LXX D>{^3Nn"l . 

nyan] i.e. in Gibeah of Saul: see on 9, i. 

^t^N] 31, 13. Gen. 21, 33t. 

nD13] RV. ' in Ramah,' which is inconsistent with ' in Gibeah.' 
RV. m. ' in the height : ' but noi is not used of a * height ' in general 
(Ez. 16, 25 forms hardly an exception); and it is better to read with 
LXX ev Ba/Att (= "^9??) in the high-place (cf. 9, 12). Saul held his 
court under a sacred tree (cf. Jud. 4, 5 of Deborah administering 
justice under a "^9^), and in a sacred place. 

V?y D''3^3] stationed by him, i. e. standing in attendance on him, 
fjy yil (and similarly ^y ^Dy) is said idiomatically of one standing by 
(lit. over: Lex. 756^0) another (Gen. 18, 2. 28, 13), esp. of servants, 
or courtiers, in attendance on their master (vv. 7. 17. Gen. 45, i ; 
cf. with "iJDy Jud. 3, 19), or the people standing about Moses, as be 
sat to judge them (Ex. 18, \^\ cf. ^V T?y \'^\ 

In clause b the series of ptcpp. describe the situation, as (e.g.) 
I Ki. I, 40; 22, 10; 2 Ki. 6, 32. 

7. 03^3^ (2)] is most probably an error for D3?31 ; otherwise it will 
be an example of 7 marking the accus., on which see 23, 10. 

8. 'y\ maa] 18, 3. 20, 8. 16 : without nna, as 20, 16. 

nbh] is sick because of me. This can hardly be right. In the 
poetical passage Am. 6, 6 the apathy of the boisterous revellers of 
Samaria is well described by the words ^Dl*" "»3B' py ibna N71 'and 
feel no sickness by reason of Joseph's breach : ' but the passage here is 
different. LXX ttovcov, which represents TCiU in the passage of similar 
import 23, 21 '•^y on^Dn ""3. Hence Gratz, Klo. Bu. al. ^»n : 'and 
none of you hath compassion on me.' Dr. Weir makes a similar 
suggestion : ' Is it •^^'PQ ? [" and there is no compassion on your part 
upon me:" cf. Gen. 19, 16] comp. 23, 21 LXX.' 

nx^ . . . Xl'''^r\'\ Cf. 13 nnx^ 'hvt, Dlp^ 'to rise up against me into 
(= so as to become) one lying in wait;' Mic. 2,8 (reading, for 
D»1p\ mp\ or IDpri) 3MNb W 'OP. LXX (in both verses) cts ex^pov, 

XXIL 6-18 181 

which Dr. Weir prefers, remarking that 'D^pn is not suitable to 3i.i<, 
but is so to a^N.' So Sm. Now. Ehrl. 

9. bv 3^:3] 7y 2V3 may mean here either merely standing by (Gen. 
18, 2), or {v. 6) standing in attendance on Saul's CISV (courtiers). 

10. 17 iriJ nT'^'l] the variation in order is pleasing in itself, and 
also gives a slight emphasis on miv. Cf. 6, 14b. 7, ib. Gen. 27, 16. 
32, 17b. 43, 12. 13. I Ki. II, 18 li? nDN Dnh, etc. 

13. 1^ hNtri] the inf. abs., according to GK. § 113® (cf. § 113^), 
Ew. § 35 1®, Kon. iii. § 218c. After an inf. c, as 25, 26. 33 ; cf. Ex. 
32, 6. 

14. "inyjDB'D ^X ")Dl] RV. z> /a^f« into' thy council, following Ges. 
(qui devertere solet ad colloquium tuum, qui interioris apud te admis- 
sionis est), and Keil. This, however, assumes an unusual sense for 
TiD, which is hardly justified by the parallels quoted. Gen. 19, 2. 3. 
Jud. 4, 18. 19, 12 (to 'turn aside' to visit a person). Probably for 
"ID we should read with LXX, Targ. (ap^wv, 31) "i^ ' captain over thy 
body-guard' (PN for 7V', see on 13, 13), which would imply a posi- 
tion of responsibility, and close attendance upon the king. For this 
sense of nvOK'D (lit. obedience, i. e. a body of men bound to obedience), 
cf. II 23, 23 (= I Ch. II, 25) inyCli'D (Ch. hv) ^K in in?D''K'''1: the 
word is also used in a concrete sense in Is. 11, 14 DnyOK'D flDy ^J31. 
So Ew. Bertheau (on i Ch. /. c), Then. etc. 

15. T,7nn] 'Have I begun.?' The question is indicated by the 
tone (11, 12). 

nan T^^VI , . . DC'^ ^n] '3 D^K' lit. to lay in, i. e. to attribute to, as 
Job 4, 18 : so'b U''^ Dt. 22, 8. 

^ax n^n i?33] LXX, Pesh. 'Ji bai, which is required. 

17. D''Vnn] the rutiners, or royal escort of the king: so 21, 8 
(emended text), i Ki. 14, 27. 28 (= 2 Ch. 12, 10. 11). 2 Ki. 10, 25. 
II, 4. 6. II. 13. 19: cf VJS^ D^^in II 15, I. I Ki. I, 5; and ch. 8, 11 
in33nD ''JD7 l^k'm. If the emendation on 21, 8 is correct, Doeg will 
have been the most stalwart of Saul's ' runners.' 

ny dt] I Ch. 4, 10: II 14, 19 (riN); Jar. 26, 24 (nx). 

18. rin] Ew. § 45<i. Kt. uses '' in the Syriac fashion: the Qr6 
warns the reader to pronounce it sofdy, and not differently from JNin 
V. ^. 21,8. Cf. p. 120 n.; and D''^jnsi beside a''Nna (GK. § 93^). 

i82 The First Book of Samuel, 

nns 3D] For the emph. nnx, cf. on 17, 56. 

Nin y3D''l] Note the emphasis expressed by the pronoun : as Ex. 

18, 19. 22. 26 etc. {Tenses, § 160 note\ 

nn liax] So 2, 18. II 6, 14 (= i Ch. 15, 27)t. LXX, however, 
omits ^3, probably rightly : for this ' ephod ' is not worn, but ' borne,' 
by the priests (cf. on 2, 28). 

20. ■j^D"'ns!?] GK. § 1 291* and 129©. 

22. TIDD] n3D in Biblical Hebrew is used somewhat peculiarly in 
I Ki. 12, 15 ^"^ DJ?D [2 Ch. 10, 15 n3p3] n3D nn'-n ^3 lit. 'for there 
was a turning about (i. e. a turn or change of affairs : LXX fjieraa-Tpocfirj) 
from Yahweh that he might establish his word,' etc. : in the philo- 
sophical Hebrew of the middle ages, it acquires the sense of cause. 
Hence this passage has been rendered, *I have been the cause in 
(the death of) all the persons of thy father's house.' The legitimacy 
of this rendering is questionable. There is no evidence that n3D 
possessed the sense cause in Biblical times ; nor is it probable, if it 
did, that 33D (in Qai) would be a denominative of it ; and thirdly, 
even though there were a verb 33D to be the cause, its use with ellipse 
of the crucial word death is more than is credible. It is best for '»n3D 
to read, with Th. We., ''Jjl3n / avi guilty in respect of all the 
persons, etc. : cf. Pesh. is^L**»l(. The construction with 3 as 'l st2n 

19, 5, where Targ. has the same word in the Ethp. with the same 
construction, viz. '3 3"'''nnN. 

23. "[^ti^ .... '•t^'Sj] The suffixes must have been accidentally 
transposed : "'^J'SJ .... 1B>Q3 (Th. We. Bu. etc.). 

noy nnN mOB^O "is] 'For thou art a keeping with me,' i.e. shalt 
be jealously guarded with me. The abstract for the concrete, 
according to a usage of which there are many other examples in 
Hebrew {Tenses, § 189.2): comp. Is. 11, 14 DriV^fJ? p»y ^J31i. 
LXX on ireffivXa^at crv irap e/i.01 = ''"tJ^J? nnX PTpm '•S (j for D, the 
two letters being very similar in the old character), — which has nothing 
to recommend it. 

' And the remarkable parallel in Moabitic : Mesha, line 28 nVDK'D |3''1 ^3 ''3 
tit. for all Dibon was obedience. 

XXIL i8— XXIII. s 183 

23 — 26. David as an outlaw, in the Shephelah, the Hill-country, 
and the Wilderness of Judah. 

23, I. n^-'yp] In the Shephelah (Jos. 15, 44; see v. 33); now 
Qild, a ruined village on a hill, on the E. side of W. es-Sflr, 3 miles 
S. of 'id el-miyeh, 'the terraced sides of which are even to-day 
covered with corn,' so that we can understand why the Philistine 
raiders should have swarmed up the Vale of Elah and the Wady 
es-Sfir, past Sochoh and 'Id el-miyeh, to rob the threshing-floors 
(of. Cheyne, EB. s. v. ; H. G. 230). 

D''DK' nom] robbing (without ' and they are '), — a circ. clause, like 
Gen, 15, 2. 18, 8 etc. {Tenses, § 160), and following another ptcp., as 
28, 14. II 15, 30. 2 Ki. 2, 12. Jer. 38, 22. 

2. JT'Sni , , . Tl'sni] There is considerable irregularity in the 
punctuation of the i and 2 pers. of the conjugations (other than Qal) 
of rfh verbs : but the following points may be usefully noted : — 

^ is found always in Pu. Hof. (as ^l''^^"!^ Ex. 26, 30), and Nif. (except once, 

Gen. 24, 8 n''ip31) ; '__ is found always in i pi. (^J-_), and before suffixes, and in 
2 sing. Pi. ; and almost always in 2 pi, (as DriMnn^n), probably the only excep- 
tions being Dri''3"in Ez. 11, 6, and Dri''};nn Jer. 42, 20 Qre (Kt. DTiynn). 

The irregularity is greatest in i and 2 sing. Hif. and Hithp. and in i sing. Pi. ; 

but here ^ is very common in the first person, and *___ in the second (as always 

in Pi.; see above): thus we find ^n""!)!! 15 times, but n^3n 17 times; ''n''inriK'n 
(3 times), but H^inriB'n (4 times) ; W^Vn (10 times), but ri''|'.yn (6 times; also 
rT'^yn Ex. 32, 7. 40, 4t); ^T?"!'? ('^ times), but ri''3"in (4 times; but 2 fem. 
n^3"in). A notable exception is '*Ty\)i 5 times, but ''nMJf 3° times; comp. also 
''n\e'3 4 times, but W^a Nu. 25, iif : W?? twice, but '•fT'Da 4 times. See Bo. i. 
pp. 410 f., 429 ; in GK. § 75*1 «« the usage might have been stated more clearly. 

3. ""a ^IXl] = and how much more, when, as 2 Ki. 5, 13. 
niDiyo] Cf. 4, 2. 12. 16 ; 10 times in ch. 17 ; and II 23, 3. 

4. n^-iyp m] Not from 'AduUam, — at least if this was at 'Id el-miyeh 
(1468 ft.), which is lower than Qe'ilah (1520 ft.),— but presumably 
from the 'forest of Hereth ' (22, 5), which will have been somewhere 
in the higher, central part of Judah. 

irib] they«/. instans : see on 3, 11. 

5. inri] The word used as 30, 2. 20, hke the Greek ayccv. 

184 The First Book of Samuel, 

6. There is some disorder in this verse : Abiathar fled to David, 
before he reached Qe'ilah ; and clause b cannot be construed so as to 
yield an intelligible sense (as it stands it can only be rendered ' (the) 
ephod came down in his hand^)'^. The simplest course is to read 
after in ^N either, with LXX (B), n^n T)SN(n)l Tl"' r\Vv? Tit DV Nini 
(so Bu. alt.), or (cf. Now., but not Luc.'^) n^a niDN(n)l r\Vvp T\\ Even 
this change does not entirely relieve the verse of difficulty ; for the 
sense required is after Abiathar fled, which is not strictly expressed 
by nn"'3N m23. AV. RV. ' that he came down with an ephod in his 
hand,' This (irrespectively of the difiiculty in clause a) yields an 
excellent sense : only it should be clearly understood that it is no 
rendering of the Massoretic text (11^3 TT* ^^DN). AV. (and occasionally 
even RV.) sometimes conceals a difficulty by giving a sense that is 
agreeable with the context, regardless of the fact that the Hebrew 
words used do not actually express it : i. e, they implicitly adopt an 
emendation of the text. Comp. on 17, 20: 24, 20; 25, 30: and 
see Jer. 19, 13. Ez. 45, 21 RV. 48, 29 (n^mn for rhn^d). Ley's 
proposal to read riN for hvi. (ZATW. 1888, p. 222) does not touch the 
real difiiculty of the verse. 

7. "133] LXX 7reTrpaK€v = "I?? (comp. Jud. 4, 9). Sold, however, 
is here scarcely suitable. If the text be correct, the sense will be to 
treat as strange = to alienate, reject (cf. Jer. 19, 4 '">^"' t:!^\>'^'^ "^"^ l"^??^!). 
construed here pregnantly with T^n. But the context in Jeremiah is 
not parallel ; and the figure here would be rather a forced one. 
Ch. 26, 8, in a similar context, we have "12D, which, however, would 
here give rise to an inelegant alliteration with the following "13D3. 
Perhaps Krochmal is right in suggesting "I3p, which is construed 
with Tf in Is. 19, 4 in exactly the sense that is here required, and 
only diff'ers from 12J by one letter. The Versions, other than LXX, 
render only by a general term deliver ("IDJD, ^^>ft\>(^, tradidit), from 
which nothing can be inferred as to the reading of the text which the 
translators had before them. 

1 It is moreover out of connexion with clause a : for according to all but uniform 
usage \-|"'1 would be resumed by either TIEN "n^ or T)> TiDNI or mSX T?.»1, but 
not by m* niEN {Tenses, § 78 end). 

* Luc. omits Kal avrbs utra AavfiS, but otherwise agrees with B. 

XXIII. 6-13 185 

NU^ "i:DJ] hath shui himself in (Ez. 3, 24) in (by) enieritig etc. 

nnai DTil^n] Dt. 3, 5. 2 Ch. 8, 5; cf. 14, 6. 

8. TH-h] presumably from Gibeah of Saul (22, 6), 2^ miles N. of 
Jerusalem (on 9, i). 

9. cnriD] was fabricating, forging. Apparently a metaphor derived 
from the working of metal: cf. HtJ'TO B'lh Gen. 4, 22. i Ki. 7, 14. 
Elsewhere in this figurative sense only in Proverbs, and only there in 
Qal (3, 29 ny-i ^J/•^ hv K'-inn ^s*. 6, 14. 18. 12, 20. 14, 22t). The 
position of \hv makes it emphatic, against him (and not some one 
else): comp. Jer. 11, 19, and on II 15, 4. 

10. VDC' y»K'] See on 20, 6. 

Tyb nnc'^] So, with b, Nu. 32, 15. nnc' is construed so constantly 
with an accus. that, though there is a tendency in Heb. for Pi'el, and 
especially for Hif.\ to be construed with h, expressing the dativus 
conunodi (or incommodi), this is probably an instance of the use of 7 to 
mark the accusative, such as is regular in Syriac, and occurs in 
Hebrew, rarely in the early and middle periods of the language, and 
with greater frequency in exilic and post-exilic writings. See 22, 7. 
II 3, 30 -|J3N^ mn (see note) ; Jer. 40, 2 ,tdT^ . , . np''1 ; i/^. 69, 6 
Th'^^b nyT nriN; 73, 18 id^ n'^'^n al. : Ew. § 277©; GK. § 117°; 
Lex. 512^. 

1 1 f. rh^vp ''^ys] This use of C^ya to denote the lords or citizetis 
of a tov,'n is rare: Jos. 24, 11 (of Jericho). Jud. 9, 22 fif. (Shechem). 
20, 5 (Gibeah). II 21, 12 and 2, 4 LXX (Jabesh of Gilead)'^. 

13. i3^nn'' nc'Nz "i3bnn'"i] Cf. 2 Ki. 8, i nun ncNn nw; II 15, 20 
l^in 'JN ncN* ^y ihn '•jni; comp. also Ex. 3, 14. 4, 13. 16, 23. 
33, 19. Ezek. 12, 25. A Semitic idiom, copiously illustrated by 
Lagarde, in a note at the end of his Psalterium Hieronymi (1874), 
p. 156 f, especially from Arabic authors, and employed where either 

^ E. g. '7 riTin to give life to, Gen. 45, 7 ; '? QTlin to give width to, ^. 4, 2 al. ; 
6 n^jn II 7, i; 6 r\1'\r\ Hos. 10, i; h p'''nr\ is. 53, u to give right to. 
Comp. Ew. § 282"=; Lex. silk's a; and Giesebrecht's careful study on this preposi- 
tion, Die Hebrdische Praeposition Lamed (Halle, 1876), p. 80 f. 

2 Comp. in Phoenician CIS. i. 1 20 TlJTl n?y3 TSYWi ' Irene citizen of Byzan- 
tium ' (in the Greek '%pi\vri Bufwrca) ; and Cooke, NSI. p. 50. 

1 86 The First Book of Samuel, 

the means, or the desire, to be more explicit does not exist. ' And 
they went about where they went about : ' in the present case, no 
doubt, the vagueness of the expression corresponds with the reality. 
From Lagarde's instances may be quoted : D3"iri^np Dnri Dl7p31X 
(Rashi on Gen. 20, 13, and elsewhere) Onqelos renders as he does 
render ; ^;l5^ U ^jl5J fuit quod fuit = missa haec faciam ; U jtJL^li 
jtJLo c>u3l age quod agis = non euro quid facturus sis, et liberam 
agendi ut volueris potestatem tibi concedo ; xMo ^^ xMo emersit 
[ex undis] qui emersit = non attinet exponere qui et quot emerserint ; 
luJLc juttj JSV^ ?~3j^^ <Sj^ ij^ -J^j ad regem Persarum Par- 
wezum profectus est eo consilio quo profectus est = nil attinet 
explicare quaenam itineris causa ac ratio fuit : Arnold, Chrestomathia 
Arabica, p. 143, 7 nisi forte »^j^ U ^Jtjli. mutaverit eos quod eos 
mutavit = nisi forte nescio quae res eos mutaverit. Sm. quotes also 
Qor. 53, 16. 

14. "13103] i.e. in some part of the rocky and desolate region 
called the 'wilderness of Judah' (Jos. 15, 61-62, where six cities 
belonging to it are enumerated; Jud. i, 16 [text very doubtful]; 
Ps. 63 title), bearing down by steep and rough descents to the Dead 
Sea, and extending some 15 miles from W. to E., and some 35 miles 
from N. to S. {H. G. 312, — followed by a vivid description of its wild 
and barren scenery). It begins in about the longitude of Ma'on and 
Carmel (23, 24. 25, i), but becomes wilder and more desolate as it 
descends towards the Dead Sea. 

n'nifD3] {mounta,m-) fastnesses; cf. Is. 33, 16 D'^y^D nnvn. So 
vv. 19. 29. Jud. 6, 2 ; and (in the sing.) i Ch. 12, 9. 17 [al. 8. 16]. 
■in3] the elevated central ' hiil-country ' of Judah (Jos. 15, 48-60). 
fj^ "13'1»3] probably an intrusive anticipation of 5^. 15. 

15. NIM] ' Here, in spite of 26, 3, we must with Ew. I/t'st. iii. 
127 (E.T. 92) vocalize N"]M., not only in order to secure a connexion 
with what precedes, but especially to obtain a motive for what 
follows: cf. V. 16 "strengthened his hand," and v. I'j "fear not"' 
(We.). And so Dr. Weir: ' Rather, was afraid ; see next verse.' 

Pin] now Tell ez-Zf a conspicuous mound, 2882 ft. above the sea, 
4 miles S. by E. of Hebron, on a plateau of ' red rolling ground, 

XXIIL 14-ig 187 

mostly bare, partly wheat and barley, broken by limestone scalps 
partly covered by scrub, and honey-combed by caves,* which begins 
soon after Hebron is left {H. G. 306 «.). This plateau is the 
'wilderness' of Ziph. Jos. 15, 55 mentions Zif as in the mm'' "in. 

nti^'ina] The prep. 1 and the n locale combined. So v. 19; 31, 13 
ntyT^; Jos. 15, 21 r]2:^}^; n 20, 15 rh2\<i; jer. 52, 10 r\Tbpr\2. 
And even with p, as Jud. 21, 19 '? njisi'p; Jos. 15, 10 njisso ; 
Jer. 27, 16 n^33D. Here the n was already read by LXX (though 
wrongly understood) Iv ttj KaLvfj = nK'nnn. 

The word is pretty clearly (notice HB'^ri, not ndHn, in v. 16) not an appella- 
tive ('in the wood'), — Conder(Z'. ^. 243) observes that trees could never have 
grown on the dry porous formation of the plateau of Zif, — but the name of a. place, 
Horesh or Hof^shah [on H loc. in names of places, see Tetises, § 132 Obs?\, — perhaps 
the ruin Huresa (or Khoreisd), \\ miles S. of Tell ez-Zif (Conder; Buhl, 97 ; 
^.6^. 307«.). 

16. n^ nx pTfT*!] fig. for encouraged; so Jud. 9, 24. Jer. 23, 14. Is. 
35, 3. Ezr. 6, 22. Neh. 2, 18. 6, 9 al., always with the pi. hands (so 
LXX here) : cf. with the Qal II 2, 7 al. 

17. *lXVr:n] Cf. with T' Is. 10, 10. \^. 21, 9. But NVD does not 
correspond phonetically with Aramaic ^<9^> \\\\\\ which Miihlau-Volck, 
in the loth edition of Gesenius' Lexicon^ compare it : N^fD = J_sd = 
tWJJtXs advenire: N^O = aoma7; — in conj. I 2 iy-=- PVeT) porrigere, 
praebere. See Noldeke, ZDMG. 1886, p. 736. 

p] so, in accordance with what has just been stated. Cf. \\f. 90, 12 
^ so — i.e. in accordance with v. 11 — teach us,' etc. 

18. Cf. 18, 3. 

19 — 24, 22. A doublet to ch. 26, beginning with almost the same 
words, and containing a different version of the same occurrences. 

19. "i^yi] Tell el-Fial (2754 ft.) = Gibeah (see on 9, i) is lower 
than Ziph (2882 ft.); but the road from Ziph to the N. would ascend 
considerably (Hebron, 3040 ft., Halhul, N. of Hebron, 3270 ft.); 
and though it descends again to Jerusalem (2593 ft.), it rises again 
to Gibeah (2754 ft.), so that there would be considerable ascents 
between Ziph and Gibeah. The parallel, 26, i, has, however, INSM 
for ii5s;>i. 

car] Read D^ern, as 26, i. 

i88 The First Book of Samuel, 

|1C''{;'''n . . . ntJ'ini] These definite localities are inconsistent both 
with the preceding indefinite nn^, and with the need of searching 
for David, expressed in the verses which follow. The words from 
nyan seem to have been inserted here from 26, i, and riK'ini added 
to agree with vv. 15. 16. 18 (Sm.). On Hachilah and Jeshimon, see 
on 26, I, 

20. 'y\ niK ija^] h-=-in accordance wilh {Lex. 516^); elsewhere 
(Dt. 12, 15. 20. 21. 18, 6t; comp. Jer. 2, 24) the phrase is used 
with 1: comp. on 2, 16. With the rhythm or run of clause a, cf. 
Qoh. 9, 10 (accents and RV. margin). 

ITJOn uh] 'and otirs (will it be) to deliver him,' etc. Not a 
common use of 7. Cf. Jer. 10, 23 (reading I^H] VC) j ^^^d (with 7 
before the inf.) Mic. 3, i ; and, in late Hebrew, 2 Ch. 13, 5. 20, 17. 
26, 18. Comp. ^^y in II 18, 11. 

22. Tiy 13""3n] certainly not 'make yet more sure' (RV.), but 
most probably, if the text is correct, ' Prepare further ; ' cf., in a 
military sense, Nah. 2, 4. Jer. 46, 14. Ez. 7, 14. 38, 7. ' Give 
aiiention still,' with ellipse of 27, is a very doubtful rend. : not only 
is the ellipse uncertain elsewhere (see Moore on Jud. 1 2, 6), but 
3^5 \''2'\\ elsewhere has only the sense of fixing the heart firmly in 
a given direction, esp. towards Yahweh {ch. 7, 3), or to seek Him 
(2 Ch. 12, 14 al.), cf. (absol.) \\i. 78, 8. Job 11, 13 {Lex. 466^). 

DB' iriNI ""O] The Hebrew is abrupt (comp. on 2, 35). LXX for 
iriNT ^O has €v To-x^i, whence Th. We. al. restore »"l7r!!3n — ' know and 
consider his place where his fleeting foot may be.' "inp as an adj., 
however, is a doubtful form : it occurs only Zeph. i, 14, where it is 
explained questionably (see esp. Schwally, ZAW. 1890, p. 176) as 
a Pi. ptcp. ("'iilPf) ^^'^ aphaeresis of D (GK. § 52^); and it is better 
to read in Zeph. "iniprp, and here, with Ehrl., ^'^J}'(^'^ (from '^''09). 

nnx] sc. "^oiNn (16, 4). 

Nin my ony] Ex. 4, 14 nih -i3t nm ; ch. 22, is^: cf. also 27, 2 ; 

28, 8; Qoh. 9, 15. For the inf. Qal, see GK. § 113^. 

23. lyni lN"i] In this order, only here and Jer. 5, i. Elsewhere 
regularly 1N"11 lyi (z'. 22. 12, 17. 14, 38. i Ki. 20, 7. 2 Ki. 5, 7), 

^NTi '•yn (25, 17. Jer. 2, 19), nx-ii yn (24, 12. II 24, 13. i Ki. 20, 22). 
25 MSS. have here iNni lym. 

XXIIL ig-24 189 

i'ao] Very hard, . , . b'yo may mean any o/(Lgv. ii, 24), esp. with 
a neg. or DK {Lex. 580^) ; but this does not suit here : it cannot 
mean everyone (Now.); and 'take knowledge of (EVV., Dh.) gives 
to \0 a sense which it does not possess. '2. yT does, however, occur 
with the meaning know about (Jer. 38, 24. Job 37, 16, perhaps 
i/r. 31, 8; cf. ch. 22, 15); and as "O and n are often confused in the 
old characters (Introd. p. Ixvii), we may, in default of anything 
better, read ^533, and then we may rightly render ' take knowledge 0/.' 

OnnK'l] and return. Neither this (We.) nor D'^^K'ni (Bu. Now. 
Kit.) can mean bring back word: see on 12, 3. 

j133 ^n] ^N must here be used as the equivalent of py, which is 
joined sometimes with substantives to express an adverbial relation ; 
i/c. 31, 24 "in.l by upon (the basis of) abundance = abundantly; Jer. 
6, 14 n^p3 by = lightly; Is. 60,7 pX"! by = acceptably. Here on 
a certainty = assuredly {Lex. 754^)- 

min^ ^sbx] not 'thousands' (EVV.), but clans of Judah; see on 
10, 19. 

24. ]'\))^ nmo] Ma'on, in the ' hill-country ' of Judah (Jos. 15, 55, — 
mentioned beside Carmel and Ziph), was identified by Robinson with 
Tell Main (2887 ft.), on a 'great hump of rock' (Conder, Tent 
Work, 244), 4A miles S. of Ziph. The 'wilderness of Ma'on' is an 
extensive steppe, E. of the Tell, consisting of ' waste pasture-land, rough 
rocks with that dry vegetation on which goats and even sheep seem to 
thrive ' {EB. s. v.). 

nmya] The 'Arabah (or Steppe) is the alluvial floor of the deep depression 
through which the Jordan runs, and in which the Dead Sea lies. It is difficult to 
understand how any part of the wilderness of Ma'on (2887 ft.) could be described as 
being 'in' the 'Arabah (in which the Dead Sea is 1292 ft. below the Medit. 
Sea). If the text is in order, we must suppose that the wilderness of Ma'on 
extended sufficiently far in the E. to reach a point which could be reckoned as 
' in ' the 'Arabah. 

p»"'tJ'"'n pts-" bx] ' on the South of the Desolation ' (AV. Jeshimon ; 
RV. the desert is too vague). p)^''C'^^ (notice the article), though it is 
used as a general term (Dt. 32, 10; Is. 43, 19 al.), is here and v. 19, 
26, I. 3 (cf. Nu. 21, 20. 23, 28) used specifically of some part of the 
wild and desolate 'wilderness of Judah' (see on v. 14), — if \'ty bx 

190 The First Book of Samuel, 

is correct (26, i has 'J3 hv), of the part South of about the latitude 
of Ma'on. 

25. K'pD^] 'Read IK'pa!' with LXX' (We.). 1 has dropped out before 
the ""l following. So Klo. Bu. Sm. etc. 

y?Dn Tim] In illustration of the fact, Dr. Weir refers appositely to 
Jud. 15, 8 Du-'j? y^D Pi^yoa nt^'^i; 20, 45. 47 nyaix |io"i y^on uk^m 
D''B'nn: D^y^D are also mentioned as hiding-places in ch. 13, 6. The 
' crag ' here meant cannot be identified ; but it must have been in 
some part of the pyo "12*1» lower than that meant in v. 24. 

3CJ'''"i] LXX IK'X : ' and came down to the crag which is in,' etc. 
This is probably right, ybon not being a proper name (We.). 

]\!ii:i 13"T»] into the wilderness, etc. ; not in, as EVV. 

26. ^n::'] LXX VK'JNI i'lNtJ': probably rightly. 

About 4 miles SE. of Tell ez-Zif there begins a deep and narrow gorge, with 
rocky sides, called first W. el-Wa'r and then IV. el-Maldqy, which runs to the E. 
for a distance of some 6 miles; and it is a plausible suggestion of Conder's {Tent 
Work, 245) that this may have been the scene of the incident here recorded : there 
is, Conder says, no other place near Ma'on, where cliffs, or crags {Seta', v. 28), 
can be found. But it is precarious to support the identification by the phonetically 
imperfect resemblance of ' Malaqy ' to nipPniS {v. 28). 

TDrii in ^T'1] ' And David came to be (on 18, 9) hurrying in alarm, 
. . . and Saul and his men were surroundmg David and his men to 
take them,' — the ptcpp. describe the situation, into the midst of which 
the message, z^. 27, came. For the idea expressed by TSDJ, cf 
II 4, 4 (Qal), 2 Ki. 7, 15 (Nif.). "iDy is, howeverj a very rare word, 
found otherwise only once in poetry {xp. 5, 13!, of surrounding 
protectingly with a shield); and Klo. proposes D"'t3y (14, 32. 15, 19) 
\^tXQ. flying at David (so Bu. Sm.). This, however, cannot be said to 
be probable. Ehrlich, more probably, suggests on^y were crossing 
over to the other side of the mountain to take David, when the 
message arrived. 

28. ^"''ip] with dag. f. implicitum (GK. § 22c eytd) in the "1, as in 
"VfT^-i Is. 14, 3 Baer and Ginsb. (GK. § 22s cjid). So SS and Kit. 
Baer and Ginsb. read ^T^^ : cf. i, 6. 10, 24 (see the Addenda). 

mpbriDn] prob. of divisions ^, Saul and David there parting from 

* Though T\\y?r\t2 is elsewhere used only in a concrete sense, of the di 

XXIII. 2S-XXIV. 4 191 

the neighbourhood of one another: cf. the Nif. in i Ki. 16, 21. 
Gen. 14, 15. A popular explanation of the meaning of the name. 
'Dathe, Ges., De Wette, "rock of escapes;" but Th. objects rightly 
that the sense of escaping is not established for ppn ' (Dr. Weir) ^ 
LXX Trkxpa y] fjiepLcrOelaa = nppriDn JJpD . Targ. has the characteristic 
paraphrase, ' the place where the heart of the king was divided to go 
this way and that.' 

24, I. by^l] Very surprising, in the present context. 'En-gedi, in the 'wilder- 
ness' of Judah (Jos. 15, 62), the modern ^Ain-jidi, is a spring, bursting out from 
under a great boulder on the rocky precipitous descent to the W. shore of the Dead 
Sea, and 612 ft. above it (cf. G. A. Smith, EB. s.v. ; and the writer's note on 
Gen. 14, 7) : it is 680 ft. below the Medit. Sea, and consequently some 3560 ft. 
below Ziph (2882 ft.), and considerably below any place which could reasonably be 
included in the 'wilderness of Ma'on' {v. 25); David could not therefore have 
' come up ' to 'En-gedi from any of the places mentioned before. Either something 
has been omitted (so that Dti'D does not refer to nipPHDn y^D in the ' wilderness 
of Ma'on,' v. 35), or the verse is due to some redactional confusion. 

3. ''3S ^y] The expression is ambiguous. ''JD py may denote 
either (i) 07i the surface of. Gen. il, 8. Ex. 32, 20. II 18, 8 ; or (2) 
on the front ^(usually in the sense of on the East of; see on 15, 7). 
In sense (i) ""JD ?y is commonly used with words of scattering or 
casting : nor does it appear why here the surface of the rocks of the 
chamois-goats should be so particularly specified. Probably, therefore, 
(2) is preferable : though, as Ges. remarks, there is nothing here to 
guide us as to whether the ' front ' definitely means the East. Wild 
goats still abound in the neighbourhood of 'En-gedi; and the 
D^7y^^ '•■^IV must have designated some locality in which they were 
particularly apt to congregate. 

4. |XVn nma] Cf. Nu. 32, 16. 24. 36. Zeph. 2, 6. Low stone-walls 
(' build,' Nu. 32, 16), forming enclosures for sheep. 

Q>2C'''] 'were in the recesses (Am. 6, 10. Is. 14, 15. 37, 24 al.) 
of the cave, sitting down.' 

of a people (Jos. 11, 23. 12, 7. 18, 10), or (especially in Ch.) of the divisions 
(i. e. ' courses ') of priests and Levites. 

* It is assumed (though very questionably) by the Rabbis, and even favoured by 
Gesenius, for the Hif. in Jer. 37, 12. 

192 The First Book of Samuel, 

5. ">0N "IK'n] Do these words mean of which he said — the allusion 
being to some previous assurance of deliverance from Saul, which 
David's followers apply to the present occasion (Kp.) ; or on which he 
says, — the occasion itself being interpreted by them as an indication 
of Yahweh's purpose to deliver Saul into his hands (Th. Ke. We.) ? 
In order to answer this question properly, the nature of "iK'K and its 
use in parallel cases must be considered in some detail. 

ICX is properly not a relative pronoun, but a relative sign, indicating generally 
and indeterminately the idea of relation = aj to which: it is followed in strictness 
by a pronominal or adverbial (Dt5^) supplement, defining more closely the nature 
of the relation which it is used to express — "IvV *im Iti'N K'''Xn the man as to 
whom he spake concerning him = the man concerning whom he spake. There are, 
however, certain cases — besides the familiar one, in which the pronominal supple- 
ment is the direct object of the verb — in which the pron. or adv. supplement is 
dispensed with, (a) with "l)pN T^N, followed by the words used, where, however, 
its place is really taken by a pronoun in the speech which follows, as Gen. 3, 17 
the tree as to which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat from it, 
Dt. 28, 68. I Ki. 8, 29. Jer. 32, 43; ch. 9, 23'': ib. 17 the man as to whom I said 
unto thee, This one (nt) shall rule my people Israel ; Jud. 7, 4 (exactly similar) 
and (where the noun repeated takes the place of the pronoun) Jud. 8, 15 Behold 
Zebah and Zalmunna', as to whom ye reproached me, saying. Is the hand of Zebah 
and Zalmunna' now in thine hand? etc. In 2 Ki. 17, 12. 21, 4 a term nearly 
equivalent to the antecedent of "^CX follows similarly in the speech. The pron. or 
adv. supplement is dispensed with (b') when a word denoting time ox place or manner 
has immediately preceded lE^X : thus (a) Dt. 4, 10 mCJ? "ItJ'X D1^ the day on 
which thou stoodest, Gen. 45, 6. i Ki. 9, 10. 22, 25 and frequently : (;3) Gen. 39, 20. 
Dt. 8, 15. Is. 64, loal.i; (7) in , , . "IK'N ")3nn HT this is the matter as to which 
(or, account how') . . . Jos. 5, 4; i Ki. 11, 27 *. It is dispensed with (c) in a few 
extreme instances, in which it is left to the reader's intelligence to define the relation 
intended: as Nu. 21, 16; Dt. 7, 19; Is. 8, 12 IDX'' "IB'K ^2^ "Wp |nDNn i6 
"iB'p ntn Dyn, where 1CN'' would normally be followed by l!? ; 31,6 "HJ^N^J 131B^ 
mo ')p''Dyn Turn ye to (him, as to) whom they have deeply rebelled. 

Applying the principles that have been thus determined to the 
passage before us, we shall see that presumption favours its being 
regarded as analogous to d (a). Had the sense intended by the 

^ And regularly after n"'N3, "ItJ'X ^22 {ch. 14, ^^y) = wherever, "ItJ'XD (Ex. 5, 11. 
Ru. 2, g)/rom the place where = whencesoever, IK'N (?N) py whithersoever, II 15, 
20 al. 

- Comp. the use of "13T in the phrase , . , "l^l '^H Dt. 15, 2. 19, 4. i Ki. 9, 15 ; 
and in the first line of the Siloam Inscription. 

XXIV. s-8 193 

narrator been, ' Behold the day, as to which Yahweh said to thee, 
I will etc.,' we should have expected (on the analogy of a) DVn run 
':) jriN ""aJN Ninn nvi ybii nin- ion nc*N. As it is, ncN has the 
presumption of being determined by the preceding DVn : ' Behold 
the day on which Yahweh saith unto thee. Behold, I am about to 
deliver etc' Compare the very similar passage, Jud. 4, 14. 

T^nx] The Qre is right (notice 1^). Cf. on II 24, 13. 

5b. 6. To produce a logical sequence in the narrative 5^. 6 should 
be transposed so as to follow S^'. 

6. !133 nx] ' After fji^ eight MSS., and LXX, Pesh. Vulg. insert 
^^''VBn, — necessarily, as the art. is wanting' (Dr. Weir). So We. 

7. nin''0 h Th'hv?^ 'Ad profanum sit mihi a Domino^ — the usual 
h ^"hvx (12, 23) being strengthened by the act being represented as 
deprecated on Yahweh's part: cf. i Ki. 21, 3; and see on 11 23, 17. 

Dn] After rhhn with the force of an oath, as II 20, 20 : more 
impassioned than the more ordinary constr. of nPvn with p of the 
act deprecated (e.g. 26, 11). See GK. § 149 ; Lex. 321*. 

(^nx) niiT n^-^'M] See GK. § i6h. So v. 11. 26, 9 a1. 

8. nnmn . . . yoy'^l] ' And David tare his men with words.' ' yO'^:' 
is to cleave : in Qal only ptcp., of the cloven hoof, Lev. 11, 3. 7. 26. 
Dt. 14, 6. 7; in Piel, Lev. i, 17. Jud. 14, 6 -"nin y3"L;'3 inyot^^^l and 
he rent it (the lion) as one would rend a kid. It follows that the 
Heb. text here yields no sense' (Dr. Weir). We. defends MT. on 
the ground that the addition onnn (cf. Job 32, 4) implies that the 
verb is a figurative one ; but if MT. be correct, David — to judge 
from such knowledge of the Heb. word used as we possess — must 
have expressed himself with singular violence, and in terms which 
would be suitable rather to an abusive and malicious attack by words 
(comp. the Lat. proscindere = to satirize, defame), than to a simple 
rebuke or ' check ' (so RV., but not fully representing yotJ'). None 
of the emendations that have been proposed is, however, satisfactory 
(Th. n2fl\; Dr. Weir, 'Perhaps y?»!l or t2i?.fll;' Klo. ^bx»1). Bu. 
agrees. ^5^^!! is a word that would be appropriate to the context 
(cf. II 18, 16); but yoc^M could scarcely have arisen out of this by 
the ordinary processes of transcriptional corruption. The renderings 
of the Versions are : LXX €7reto-e, Pesh. ^ot made to repent, Targ. 


194 T^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

DSQ persuaded, pacified, Aq. crweKAacrei' (hence Vulg. con/regit), Symm. 
TTcpieoTracrev, Theod. rjirdrrja-ev. 

10. K'pajo] 2s seeking, — much more expressive than ' seeketh ' 

11. IDNl] The tense is irregular: the pf. with simple wazv is 
improbable : the pf. with waw conv. is out of place, the idea of 
reiteration being evidently not what is here intended to be expressed. 
Jerome's "ipJ^J {e/ cogiiavi ut occiderem te), of course, cannot be right. 
Either "1DN''1 and one said must be restored, or we must follow LXX 
Kttt ovK r}PovXrjBy}v and read l??9^J and I re/used (We. etc.). 

^3^1?] -og-: cf. on 15, I. 

Dnni] Elsewhere followed always by py (Dt. 7, 16 and frequently). 
The ellipse, considering the standing usage of the word, is not 
probable. Sept. Targ. Pesh. express the first person Dnxi : onni may 
have been * written in error by a scribe, who expected '•J''y to follow ' 
(We. Sm. Now.). Or (Bu.) '':''y may have dropped out after Dnni : 
it is expressed by Vulg. 

12. nx"! 02 nsn] The repetition of the imper. after DJ is certainly 
very un-Hebraic : and Ehrl. would read — as Hupfeld did long ago 
{Comm. in quosdam lobeidos locos, 1853, p. vi) — HNT D3 HNI"!^ — the 
inf. abs. (see on i, 6). 

Trinn t<h] carrying on ^0"!??: GK. § ii4r; Tenses, § 118. 

rriilf] West in wait (not huntest, *l^if) : see Ex. 21, 13 ; also Nu. 35, 
20. 22. 'LXX 8eo-/Aeueis (= "l"?.^), translating from an indistinct text' 
(Dr, Weir). 

13a-. Cf. Gen. 16, 5^ 31, 53. For "-JOpJi, see GK. § ii2q. 

16. ... nTil] The pf. and waw conv. with the force of a wish : 
cf. Tenses, § 1 1 9 8. 

1TD ''3t3aK"l] and judge me (and free me) /ram thy hand: see on 

25> 39- 

19*. mjn] viz. by thy action in sparing me. But Klo.'s n^njn 
' hast magnified {ci. Gen. 19, 19) that which thou hast done to me (as) 
good ' yields a better sense; so Sm. Bu. Now. Kitt. Ehrlich. 

"•riN] after nc^y, as II 2, 6t>; cf. with IDH, Gen. 24, 49 al. 

19b. nK'N nx] "lti'^< alone = forasmuch as (15, 15): the DN is out 
of place, and is doubtless a scribal error, due to IB'N DN just before. 


XXIV. lo-XXV. 2 


20. inbt^'l] will he send him away? For the question thus intro- 
duced, cf. Ez. 15, 5^ : Tenses, § 123 ^8 ; GK. § 150a Klo.'s ^t?1 (GK. 
§ 112^1^;/.), with 'the general subject limited afterwards to the specific 
tr^N,' is highly improbable, — though of course without tJ'''K it would 
have been quite suitable. 

'V\ nnn] 'in return for this day—iht sense being explained by what 
follows — wherein (on v. 5) thou hast wrought for me! But as Klo. 
remarks, such a use of DVn is un-Hebraic. Klo. reads ^'itsn this good 
(Nu. ID, 32) for Drn; and we must either do the same, or adopt the 
transposition followed tacitly (cf. on 23, 6) by EW., and read 
nrn DVn h nn'^tr^y IC'N* nnn. Against LXX (dTrorto-ei auxw, and Iv 
OXiij/€l) and Th. see We. 

21. nttplj = and be confirmed, as 13, 14 ; Gen. 23, 30. Nu. 30, 5. 
23. mixon ^y iby] from 'En-gedi (23, 29), 680 ft. below the Medit. 

Sea, up past Hebron (3040 ft.) and Halhul (3270 ft.) over the high 
backbone of central Judah, and then down into the Shephelah to the 
' hold ' (22, 4) of 'Adullam (if = 'Id el-miyeh, 11 60 ft.). 

25, I. ITiJ The place from which David 'came down' does not 
appear. The intention of the note seems to be to state that David, on 
hearing of Samuel's death, came down from some unnamed higher 
spot in the min^ nn to the wilderness of Ma'on (c. 2500 ft.). 

pxa] Read Jiyo (23, 24. 25. 26), with LXX, as the context {yv. 2. 4) 
requires. The wilderness of Paran (Nu. 12, 16) is much too far 
to the south. 

2. K'''Nl] without a verb: see on 17, 12; and cf. i Ki. 11, 26. 

inK'yoi] of work in the fields: cf. Ex. 23, 16 l*K>yo n!|32. 

70132] now el-Kurmul, i mile N. of Ma'on, 'on the edge of the 
wilderness of Judah, but to the west the land is broad and fertile, not 
unlike scenes of upland agriculture in Scotland. The name Carmel 
("garden-land") is therefore suitable ' (G. A. Smith, EB. s. v.; cf. on 
ch. 15, 12). 

hn:] So II 19, 33 of Barzillai; 2 Ki. 4, 8 of the Shunammite 

rrn \-l"'l] apparently = a^id he was (engaged) in the shearing of his 
sheep,— a most unusual type of sentence, ip ^■T'1, or rather \t KWI, 


196 The First Book of Samuel, 

is what would be expected in that sense. For the unusual form of 
the inf. (in y"y verbs), HJ (so Gen. 31, 19 : 38, 13 Tip), see GK. § 67CC, 

3. !?3tr] insight, shrewdness: Pr. 16, 22 V^y3 hy^ D^^n "llpO. 

C^^yo] elsewhere only in poetry, and in prose written in the 
elevated style of Dt. (Jud. 2, 19. Neh. 9, 35). (Dn)D3''^^yD Vh occurs 
in Is. 1,16, Dt. 28, 20, and often in Jer. (as 4, 4). 

13P31 Qre ''?.-'3, a Calebite, the '• being the usual patronymic 
termination. So Targ. (n^D JT'niO) Vulg. {de genere Caleb), Rashi, 

Kimchi (p iN^P 3^53 nns^^DO n'^n^ •'d^ .dh^Sj n"i''n). 

Nabal belonged to the Caleb-clan, a clan originally distinct from Judah, but 
afterwards incorporated in it, which had settlements in the country about Hebron 
(see I Ch. 2, 42-49, where Ziph, Hebron, Tappuah, Joqde'am [so read ioxjorqo'am\ 
Ma' on, Beth-zur [4I miles N. of Hebron], are specified as some of its settlements), 
and also in the Negeb (see ch. 30, 14 the 3?3 333). See further DB. and EB. s.v. 
Caleb ; and Kittel's Die Bikher der Chronik, pp. 13 f., 19 f. 

5. 1?j;] Carmel (2887 ft.) is considerably above most of the sur- 
rounding plateau. 

n^»13] Cf. Ew. § 216C; GK. § 9oi. 
Dn^i<^1] GK. §§ 44d, 64^. 

6. ""n?] A most perplexing and uncertain word, {a) The text can 
only be the pausal form of ""n? = to him that liveth (GK. § 29^). 
But the rendering, 'And ye shall say thus to him that liveth, Both 
thou,' etc., affords a poor sense ; hence it is thought by some to be 
a form of salutation, of which no other instance occurs, ' And ye shall 
say thus, To him that liveth ! Both thou,' etc. So substantially Ges.^ 
Ke., the former comparing the common Arabic formula of salutation 
sill ellli God keep you in life = grant you good health. (,5) Vulg. 
renders fratribus meis ^]}^), following which We., admitting the 
difficulty of the passage, thinks that relatively the best explanation 
of it is to punctuate '•np ^, and to render 'And ye shall say thus to my 
brother^ (cf II 20, 9 TIN nriN uh^T\, where Joab uses the same term 

^ Thes. 469 f. The rendering In vitam is, however, doubtful, the sing. Tl life 
occurring otherwise, at most, in a particular form of oath (p. 148). 

^ In this case, however, it is almost necessary to read^V^if^ (so Bu.). It is true, 
cases of the elision of N occur (GK. § 23^), but none after a prep, with _ 

XXV. 3-10 197 

in addressing Amasa, and i Ki. 9, 13 Hiram addressing Solomon) ^ 
This seems the most probable (so Bu.). (c) Sm. would read Dn"lDX1 
':i nnx i'npi 1P ' And ye shall say io htm and to Ms clan. Be thou (at) 
peace/ etc. (so Now.) ; but a reference to Nabal's clan does not seem 
called tor. The other Versions evidently presuppose nothing different 
from the MT. LXX ei's wpas^ (= irn nyu Gen. 18, 14); Targ. yrb ; 
Pesh. .**. )oo»j? ^vi\ . For ""n = clan, see on 18, 18. 

uh'^ nriNl] Lit. Boih thou (he) peace : cf. II 20, 9 nns Dli'B'n ; and 
see on ch. 16, 4. On 1 = both (rare), see Lex. 253* h. 

7. "1^ DVT3 ^3] Cf. II 13, 23. 24. 

D13C?3n N^] So V. 15; cf Ruth 2, 15 end. For the irregular n, 
cf. nxnn Gen. 41, 28 al., rhyr\ 2 Ki. 17, 11 : GK. § 53P. 
Dn?] 7 after the pass, verb, as Ex. 12, 16 al. : Lex. 514*. 

8. ait2 or ^y] ^J? of time is most unusual. aiLO DV recurs in Esther 
(8, 17. 9, 19. 22). 

"]n* Ni'cn TC-'N JIN] Cf. (though in different connexions) ch. lo, 7. 
Lev. 12, 8. Jud. 9, 33. Qoh. 9, 10. 

10. I2"l] irregular: see GK. § 67^^. 

n''^'"lDnDn nnny] The combination of a ptcp. with the art. and 
a subst. without it occurs sporadically in OT., often (but not invariably) 
where the subst. is definite in itself or defined by the context. Thus 
Gen. I, 21. 28. 7, 21 (with .Tn"^^ and iK'a-^j) : Dt. 2, 23. Jud. 14, 3 
(with a n. pr.): 16, 27. Jer. 27, 3. 46, 16. Ez. 2, 3^. 14, 22*, Pr. 
26, 18. i/'. 62, 4 (read iT^HT rTjna). 119, 21 (accents)^. Here the 

1 Dr. Weir : ' Or is it ""riNp to my brother? But see v. 8 thy son David. n3 
may follow the verb, as Ex. 5, 15, though rarely.' Against the view that treats 
^n? as commencing the speech is the extreme abruptness which attaches then to 
HD DniDNI : what is regularly said is (piDNn) IIDXn n3, e.g. ch. 11, 9. The 
objection derived from v. 8 against ' my brother ' is not conclusive : for both brother 
and son being used metaphorically, the terms may be interchanged (especially when 
not addressed to the same person). 

^ I.e. next year : comp. Theocr. 15. 74 (quoted by Liddell & Scott, and also by 
Field here) kjjs aipas KT]TreiTa, (piK' dvSpaiv, kv KaXai eirjs. 

^ Where, however, CIJ ^N should probably be omitted with LXX. 

* Where Comill is probably right in vocalizing with LXX, Pesh. Symm. Vulg. 

^ Some other instances are noted in Tenses, § 209 (2). 

198 The First Book of Samuel, 

idea 'slaves' is virtually limited by the words 131 DVn, which shew 
that the speaker has only a particular class of them in view. 

■•JQD] ""JDO is more than \0, and usually suggests on account of, for 
fear of: cf. Jud. 9, 21^. ch. 18, 11. 19, 10. 23, 26: Lex. 818*. It 
is used especially with verbs of fleeing. 

II. '•nnph] and shall I take ? cf. Nu. 16, 10. Is. 66, 9^ (tone mihl 
on account of Tifha, Tenses, § 104) : GK. § ii2<"c. 

^D''D] LXX '•3''.''., which is generally preferred by moderns. ""CO is 
probably, as Abu'lwalid {Riqmah, ed. Goldberg, p. 175) suggested 
long ago, due to a lapsus calami. It is true, in a district (Jos. 15, 19) 
in which it was scarce, water might have been a commodity which 
would not readily be given away ; still, among the viands provided for 
the D"'TT1J, some more special beverage than water might not unnaturally 
find a place (cf. v. 18), and the change to *10^D is readily explained as 
a consequence of the frequent collocation of COI Dn?. For other 
instances of error due to lapsus calami, see ch. 12, 15. II 21, 8. Jer. 
27, I ; and no doubt also i Ki. 2, 28. 

13. vyi] See on v. 5. 

14. tDy;1] from Diy (14, 32 Qre. 15, 19), here pointed regularly. 
The Versions mostly guess. LXX c^cKAivev (but with dw avriiiv : 
DHO for dud), as 14, 32 eKXidrj ; Aq. anpvvOrj ; Symm. aTr€(npa<^r} ', 
Theod. £^oi;8eVw(r€v ; Targ. pnn ^p1 ; Pesh. yO*o>s> o»iil fco)c«o ; 
Vulg. (after Symm.) aversatus est eos. Th. considers that these 
renderings point to tSj^'l (cf. ^. 95, 10); on which We. remarks: 
' t2p''1, even if Pesh. etc. read it, would be of no help : all turns here 
on the expression of Nabal's feeling.' But t^yi^l (We. al.) is hardly 

15. 1J37nnn ^t?^"73] So (in the st. csir.) with a finite verb Lev. 
14, 46 \ t//. 90, 15 (ni»^): with ntJ'K, Lev. 13, 46. Nu. 9, 18 (GK. 
§ 130^). Elsewhere the inf., as vv. 7. 16. 22, 4. 

17. nn?3] 20, 7. 7V and 7N here interchange in one and the 
same clause : for other remarkable instances of the same variation, 
see V. 25. II 2, 9 ; 3, 29 : Jer. 26, 15. 28, 8. 

1 But some treat liJDn here as an inf. (GK. § 53^), though in that case it 
should no doubt be pointed TJipn (see Driver on Dt. 3, 3. 4, 15. 7, 24. 28, 55). 

XXV. 10-2} 199 

l?"^?] GK. § 133C. The implicit subj. is "»?19'T : see on 16, 4. 

18. •hll'] skins (so RV. /«.), as 10, 4 etc. : the do-Koi of the NT. 

nwj?] i.e. 'dsuwoth. So Kt. On the form, see Ew. §i89d; 
Stade, §§ 119b, 319C; GK. §§ 24b 75V: and comp. niltDJ Is. 3, 16. 
The Qre substitutes the normal nVtry 'asfiyoth. 

CND] the f'^i^^ {= a-drov, Mt. 13, 33) was J of an ephah, or 
2| gallons. On "hp, see on II 17, 28. 

CpDV] dried grapes, or clusters of raisins (30, 12. II 16, i. 
I Ch. 12, 4 It). The root signifies to be dry or shrivelled: in OT. 
only Hos. 9, 14 (D^pDS DH?') ; in the Talm. (v. Levy) of dried figs, 
grapes, etc. In Ps.-Jon. D^E'n^'! Q^nb D'^jy (Nu. 6, 3) is rendered by 
Pi?^»>-^ pa^DI p3J^y. Cf. Kennedy, ^^. ii. 1568. 

D''ban] pressed fig-cakes {EB. ii. 1570): 30, 12. i Ch. 12, 41 (with 
DV^^V, as a present to David's warriors). 2 Ki. 20, 7 = Is. 38, 2 if. 

20. iTni] The tense is incorrect (on i, 12). Either read \T1 
(constr. as 2 Ki. 2, 11), or (though kox lyevrjdri stands in the LXX) 
delete it as an early corrupt anticipation of the following ntj (comp. 
then, for the form of the sentence, 9, 14 : Tenses, § 169). 

mi''] to meet David, on his way up {vv. 6. 13). 

21. -lr2^? im] Note iht plupf. (on 9, 15). The clause expresses 
David's thoughts as he went along before he met Abigail. 

"JX] as Jer. 5, 4 ; see on 16, 6. 

22. nn ^n'^N^] LXX t<S AavciS = in!', certainly rightly. Analogy 
(cf. e.g. 20, 13) requires the imprecation to be uttered by the speaker 
against himself. The insertion of ••n''N is probably intentional, to 
avoid the appearance, as the threat in b was not carried out, of the 
imprecation recoiling upon David himself^ 

23. 1^32 bv nn ^2X^] We have the types, (i) ^y"l^« D*SK inntJ''1 Gen. 
19, I and often ; (2) \S VDxb '1 Gen. 48, 12. 2 S. 18, 28t, and VSS^ alone, Nu. 
22, 3it ; (3) 'N V2X bv '1 2 S. 14, 4. 33. I Ki. 1, 23t ; (4) 'N VSX "I 2 S. 24, 
2ot; also (5) (n>cnN) VJD (^Nj^y ^2^1 Jos. .s, 14. 2 S. 9, 6. 14, 22. Ru. 2, 10; 
(6) nXIS VDN^ ^SM I S. 20, 4it : but never ''SN^ another, rT^DN i^y IH *3S^ 
would therefore here be more in accordance with usage (We. al.). 

1 Comp. similar instances in the Talm., Dalman, Gramm. des Jud.-Pal. 
Aranidisch (1S94), p. 78; ed. 2 (1905), p. 109. 

200 The First Book of Samuel, 

J^-IN] 7 MSS. have the more usual nvns, which is also a T^D 
(on 12, 5). 

24. rbn ^y ^sni] Cf. 2 Ki. 4, 37 (Bu.). 

••JX U] Cf. I Ki. I, 26; and see GK. § 135?; Ew. § 311^. 

25. 733] 'Fool' is an inadequate rendering. The word in Hebrew 
suggested one who was insensible to the claims of either God or man, 
and who was consequently at once irreligious and churlish : see esp. 
Is. 32, 5 f . (where v. 6 unfolds the character of the i?3J in terms 
which recall at once the conduct of Nabal described in this chapter ^). 
See further Lex. s. v. ; Parallel Psalter, Glossary, p. 457. Here the 
best rendering would be churl — ' Churl is his name, and churlishness is 
with him,' — or, as we might say, ' is his nature.' 

26. nnyi . . . nnyi] The word repeated after the long intervening 


Resumption is a frequent characteristic of Heb. prose style. The case of '•3 ... 13 
has been noticed on 14, 39 (cf. Lex. 472*) : see also on 17, 13. The following are 
other examples, derived partly from my own observation, partly from Kon. Stilistik 
(1900), p. 129 f. : Ex. I, 15-16 ODi<"'1 . . . "IDN'"!). 4, 9''. 12, 41 (^^»1 . . . Mil). 

Lev. 13, 3 onx"ni . . . nx"n). 17, 5 0N"'2ni . . . iN^a'' |j;»^). 27, 3. nu. 5, 19-21. 

10, 32 (HMI: so Dt. 20, II. Jud. 11, 31). 14, 36-37 (D^tJ'JNn). Dt. 4, 42 

(DJ"! . . . Di:b). 18, 6 (N21 . . . N2''). Jud. 9, 16^-19" (01 nON2 DX). ch. 29, 10 

("ipnn onroac^m). 11 1, 1-2 (wi). i Ki. 8, 41-42 (x3i). 12, 10 ^n3 , . .loxn n3 

imn"^. Is. 7, 22 (HM''). 49, 6-6 (-|DX''1 . . . IDN). Jer. 3, i^-% (reading in 8 Nini, 
with most moderns). 20, 5 (|nN). 29, 25*'-3i'' ("IK'S' jy). 34, 2. 10. 18-20. Ez. 

21, 29 (ID. 24, 25-26* (Ninn Qi^n . . . mu). 28, 2«-6'' (jy). Hag. 2, i3''-i5». 

Zech. 8, 23. For some examples from later books, see Kon. I.e. Comp. also the 
cases of the resumption of a noun by NIH^ XTI, etc. {Tettses, §§ 123 Obs., 199; 198), 
and of a casus pendens by a suffix (§§ 123 a, 197, with Obs. 2). 

•""^ lyJD "itJ^s] The antecedent "•'^^ is repeated in the relative clause, 
because it is separated from "IK'S by the addition "jtJ'S: Til : contrast 
V. 34. 

-]^ -]T> VK'ini] The inf. abs., in continuation of an inf. c, as 22, 13b 
(see the note) ; and followed by a subst. standing to it in the relation 

' In EW. 733 is here rendered unfortunately vile person, and Cbs) V''? churl. 
Render : (5) ' The churl will be no more called noble, nor the knave said to be 
gentle (i.e., in modem English, a gentleman). (6) For the churl speaketh 
churlishness, and his heart worketh naughtiness, to do profaneness, and to utter 
defection (///. going astray) against Yahweh, to make empty the soul of the 
hungry, and to cause the drink of the thirsty to fail ; ' and knave for churl in v. 7. 

XXV. 2)-2g 201 

of subject (rare), as v. 33, Lev. 6, 7. i/f. 17, 5 (Ew. § 328c towards 
the end; GK. § 113^^). The phrase itself, implying an exploit or 
success, achieved against opposing obstacles hy force, recurs vv. 31. 
33. Jud. 7, 2. Job 40, 14 (^J''?^''), and with reference to Yahweh, 
Is. 59, 16. 63, 5. i/.. 98, I ; cf., with ynr, 44, 4- 

27. nj~l3] i.e. a present, called a blessmg from the feelings of good 
will, of which it is the expression: 30, 26. Gen. 33, 11. Jud. i, 14. 
2 Ki. 5, 15, 

N-an] An error for HNUn, as v. 35. So 26 MSS. 

njnJi] As in II 14, 10. Is. 9, 4, the waw conv. with the pf. intro- 
duces the direct predicate (Tenses, § 123; GK. § 143^): here, as 
20, 5. Jud. II, 8, with a precative force, 'And now this present, . . . . , 
let it he given,' etc. 

"linx h)r\'l\ at the feet of my lord = following him, Ex. 11, 8. Dt. 
II, 6. Jud. 4, 10. II 15, 16. 17 al. 

28. |DW n'l] Cf. 2, 25. II 7, 16. I Ki. II, 38. 
niiT nion^o] As 18, 17. Cf. Nu. 21, 14. 

"l^CO] An idiomatic expression = ali the days that thou hast lived, 
since thy birth: i Ki. i, 6 VO'IO V3N U^'J? N^; Job 38, 12 T'O'^cn ^ 
Ipa r\T\^\i. T'D"'0 having this sense, the pf. HNVOJ N^ would be the 
tense naturally used with it : probably NVDH N^ is chosen with the 
view of generalising the statement as much as possible, so as to allow 
it to include a possible future, — ' is not to be found in thee,' etc. 

29. nn\"i1 , , . Dp''l] 'And man has (as a fact) risen up, etc. . . . : 
but the soul of my lord shall be,' etc. If it be thought that the sense, 
' and should a man rise up . . . then may the soul of my lord be,' etc. 
is required, D^l must be read (Is. 21, 7 ; Tenses, § 149 ; GK. § 159^) : 
so Sm. Bu. Now. Dh. 

'y\ mnv] bound up for safe custody in the bundle of life. 

nx] with = in the care and custody of, as Lev. 5, 23 ; Dt. 15, 3 ; 
Is. 49, 4. 

njy^p"' , , , riNl] The object resumed, and connected directly with 
the verb by the suffix ; a frequent elegance of Hebrew style, as 
Gen. 13, 15. 21, 13: Tenses, § 197. i, 6; GK. § 143°. 

Cf. yOo»Ajoa» ^.:a> Wright, Apocr. Acts of the Apostles, p. SS, 11. 15-16. 

202 The First Book of Samuel, 

30. '31 ^DD] EVV. 'according to all the good that he hath spoken 
concerning thee/ which in Hebrew^ would be "12T "IB'S naiDH 7DD 
T^y. 24, 19 nmo '•riN nrr'ti'y nti'N ns, cited by Bu., is not parallel. 
The text is evidently in some disorder, though it is not certain how it 
is to be corrected. Either this or "f^y im "l^X naiDH i?3 nx might 
be the original reading : but in either case it is not apparent how 
naiDH DN would assume its present place. Perhaps nniDn nx was 
originally a marginal gloss. 

31. 'Then let not this be to thee a (cause of) tottering {or 
staggering), or a stumbling of heart, (viz.) to have shed innocent 
blood,' etc. Both expressions are peculiar : but the meaning appears 
to be, ' Let David avoid the difficulties which shedding innocent blood 
might hereafter involve him in, and the qualms of conscience which 
will inevitably follow it.' The kind of 'tottering' expressed by the 
root pis may be learnt from a comparison of Is. 28, 7 ; Jer. 10, 4; 
and Nah. 2, 11 (D''3"13 p'^s). The ancient translations seem merely 
to have conjectured for npID a meaning more or less agreeable with 
the context : LXX ^SeXvy/jios ^ ; Aq. Symm. Avy/xos, whence Vulg. 
in singultum et scrupulum cordis : Targ. XSV (solicitude), Pesh. 
jfcs^o) (terror). A curious Midrashic exposition of np137 may be 
seen in the Midrash Tillin on i/^. 53 (quoted by Levy, NHWB., 
s. V. \>^P^). 

ytJ'inh . . . nSK'bl] et . . . €t = both . . . attd. But no stress seems 
to rest here upon the combination ; and no doubt the first 1 is to 
be omitted, with LXX, Vulg. Pesh. After yc'inh LXX express 1^ 
(which the translators are most unlikely to have done, had not the 
word stood in their text); and the insertion, as We. remarks, is 
a necessary one : for it just gives to the expression used the sense 
o^ force {v. 26) which is required. 

33. l^yts] discretion, tact. DyLD as Pr. 11, 22. 
>jn!53] from N^3: GK. § 75^1. Cf. 6, 10. 
yK'ini] See on v. 26. 

34. ^3 . , . ^b'h ''3] as 14, 39 : the first ""D introduces the assertion 

^ In Ethiopic a different construction is possible, the antecedent being there 
frequently introduced into the relative clause : Dillmann, Aetk. Gr. § 201. i {b). 
" Possibly (but not certainly) a corruption of the unusual \vyfx6s. 

XXV. 30-39 203 

sworn to, the second is resumptive. Thenius, following LXX literally, 
gravely proposes, for the second '•3, to read ^n^Dti TX ! 

"TlNan")] By error for ^5<2riV, through the influence of the following 
••ItniP^ (so Dr. Weir). Otherwise GK. § 76^. For the tense, of. Jos. 
7, 7: and Tenses, § 140. 

"iniJ DN] if there had been left . . . ! = surely there had not been 
left. The pf., after the oath, as II 3, 27 (though not there intro- 
duced by DX). 

35. nON n^l] The pron. is emphatic: of. i Ki. 17, 131^. Jud. 12, i. 
14, 16. 

"hv] She had ' come down ' {v. 20) to meet David. 

36. nriK'O 'b njni] For the position of li?, cf. . . . 1^1 v. 2] i Ki. 4, 
10. 13; and on ch. i, 2. Comp. also Jud. 17, 5. Job 22, 8 C'XI 

pNH "h ynr. 
l^on nnc^a] Cf. II 13, 27 LXX. 

31D] 31D of the heart=^/a^, merry: II 13, 28: Pr. 15, 15 31L31 
Ton nntw ai?. So the subst. 3.^ 3^t3 Dt. 28, 47. Is. 65, 14; and 
a> >niD I Ki. 8, 66. 

V^y] lit. ?//'o« ^/>«, in accordance with Hebrew idiom : see on 17, 32. 
' Within ' (EVV.) is a paraphrase. 

37. n^ nO''l] opp. is 033^ ''H^ ' may your heart /»V^ '= take courage, 
\\/. 22, 27. 

Nini] ' and he himself (opp. to n!?). 

38. D''Ci\n mc'ya M^I] D'»''n me^ya is subject : ' And there was the 
like often days, and,' etc., 3 i/ie like 0/" being an undeveloped substan- 
tive [Lex. 453*). For the art., Dr. Weir compares 9, 20. Is. 30, 26. 
I Ch. 9, 25. Ezr. 10, 8. But CC is certainly better in accordance with 
analogy (so GK. § 134™). ' And it came to pass after ten days,' would, 
of course, be D''ro^ niK^y }^po Wl (Jer. 42, 7). Comp. i Ki. 18, i D"'Ci'' "'H''! 
□■•a"!, where CD'' is similarly the subject of \nM (for the sing., see on i, 2). 

39. ^33 n^D . . . 3i] pregnantly : cf. ^. 43, i TDH n!? '•iJO ''3n nnn ; 
and . . . TD DDK' 24, 16. II 18, 19. 31. 

t"^ n"'B'n] The subj. repeated, the IK'S* at the beginning of the 
sentence having been forgotten. 

Itrsin , ♦ . n^B'n] as Jud. 9, 57. i Ki. 2, 44 : cf. i::'X-i3 IDT Jos. 2, 
19 al., and the phrase in i Ki. 8, 32 and often in Ez. 1tJ>N"i3 1D"iT nn?. 

204 The First Book of Samuel, 

i'''3"'3N3 "in^J ' and spake concerning Abigail,' i. e. (as the phrase 
was understood to mean) asked her in marriage. Cf. Cant. 8, 8. 

42. n^^nn] Read rib|?n (the n dittographed from n^niy:) : the word 
must be the predicate— she rode, and they walked in attendance 
behind her. 

nb"i^] is not quite the same as 'hy\1 v. 21'. the 7 is the so-called 7 
of norm, ' going according to \itxfoot^ i.e. guided by her foot=attending 
upon her. Comp. for this sense of 7vh Gen. 30, 30 hath blessed thee 
'hl'h at »y/ybo/= whithersoever I turned (RV.) ; 33, 14 and I will lead 
on softly n^NPDH 7Th according to the pace of the cattle {^Lex. 516^). 

43' Ahino'am is mentioned before Abigail in 27, 3. 30, 5; she was also the 
mother of David's firstborn, Amnon (II 3, 2) ; so probably he married her shortly 
before Abigail, as the Heb. here permits (not 'T np''t, but ... Hp? DyjTIJ* flXI). 
V. 44 hints at the reason why David took now these two wives; he had been 
deprived of Michal (18, 27). 

bxyir] Not the i'xyiT'' in the N. of Palestine, but one in the hill- 
country of Judah, Jos. 15, 56, evidently not far from Ma'on and 
Carmel (mentioned there in v. 55, as in v. 2 here). 

inTlK' DJ] The D3 is idiomatic in this phrase, = ' both alike:' Dt. 
22, 22. 23, 13. Ru. I, 5. Pr. 17, 15. 20, 10. 12. 

44. JDJ ?1Nt^'l] ' /iac/ given ; ' see on 9, 15. 

"D^s] abridged from ^n^d^d, II 3, 15. 

Qipj] The situation of Gallim is not known ; but it was plainly 
(Is. 10, 30t) a little N. of Jerusalem. 

26. I. The V. is largely identical with 23, 19 (where see the note); 
and the narrative following in ch. 24 exhibits such numerous points of 
resemblance with<:^. 26 that the two have been held by many scholars 
to be in reality different versions of the same incident. If this opinion 
be correct, the more original version will be that contained in the 
present chapter. 

nnyaan] Gibeah of Saul, 2| miles N. of Jerusalem (see on 9, i). 

n^"'3nn nyn^a] Perhaps the long ridge called Dahr el-K6ld, 5^ miles 
E. of Ziph, 10 miles W. of 'En-gedi, and i mile N. of Wady 
Malaky (on 23, 26), ' running out of the Ziph plateau (see on 23, 14) 
towards the Dead Sea desert, or Jeshimon ' (Conder, T.W. 244; 
Buhl, 97). 

XXV. 39-XXVI. 7 205 

|D''C^'^^ '•JS ?y] ' m front of i\\Q Desolation ' (see on 23, 24), i.e. over- 
looking it, which, if the 'hill of Hachilah' is rightly identified, it would 
do. The passage is one which shews that ""JQ ^y does not always 
mean East of {covsvi^. on 15, 7): of. Lex. 8x8^. 

2. Till] Cf. 23, 20. Ziph is actually higher than Tell el-Ffil 
(see on 23, 19); but there is a descent from Tell el-Ful (2754 ft.) 
to Jerusalem (2593 ft.), and from Hebron (3040 ft.) to Ziph 
(2882 ft.); so no doubt 'came down' is used with reference to one 
of these. 

On the fi''T *13*10, see on 23, 15. 

3. Saul encamped, near the ordinary route, on the particular 
hill of Hachilah ; David remained somewhere in the wilderness 
around it. 

nti'V] not ' abode' (EVV.) but ^was abiding.' So v. 5^ 'was lying,' 
and 'were encamping;' v. *i 'was lying asleep,' and 'were lying.' 
The reader of the English versions, till he refers to the Hebrew, does 
not realize how much is lost by the frequent rendering of the participle 
by a finite verb. 

4. piiJ'PN] The same somewhat singular expression in 23, 23. 
Here, however, immediately following xa, the name of a place is 
expected, — and the more so, since the text, as it stands, adds nothing 
to what has been already stated in 3^, — unless indeed it can be argued 
that yi"'i marks any more certain knowledge than N"i''l. It is probable 
therefore that |133 here is the corruption of the name of some locality, 
though what that may have been it is impossible to conjecture. LXX 
Ik KetXa, as We. points out, is too vague. 

5. PJyoa] See on 17, 20. 

6. innn "JPnTlN] This Ahimelech is not mentioned elsewhere. For 
his nationality, cf. Tinn nniK- 

IT* ""JD] David must therefore have been in some part of the wilder- 
ness that was higher than n^''3nn. 

"•JX] For the pron. in such a sentence, cf. on II 21, 6 (p. 352). 

7- iriB'NiD] prop, the parts at or about the head, hence construed in 
the accus. adverbially (GK. § 118^), like niT3D and the corresponding 
vni^n», Ru. 3, 8. 14. So Gen. 28, 11 mt'NlD DB'"'') ///. and placed 
(it) at the parts about his head. 

2o6 The First Book of Samuel, 

8. We have had before i8, ii Tpni inn n3N ; 19, 10 JT'Jna ni3n^ 
Tp31 *TI*13 to smite with the spear into David and into the wall, i.e. to 
pin him with the spear to the wall. The analogy of these passages 
shews that here ' pN31 is co-ordinate not with n^Jn2, but with the suff. 
in 1J3N ' (We.). ps3 and the suffix are, however, very unequally 
coupled; and it is better to read with Krenkel {ZAW. 1882, 310) 
pN3 IJT'Jna 'with his spear {v. 7) to the earth' (so Sm. Now. Dh. 
Ehrl.). With )b n:uii ah) cf. II 20, 10. 

9. np:i , . . nb^ "lO] npJl is the pf. with waw conv., and rh^ has 
a modal force (cf. the pf. in Gen. 21, 7. if/. 11, 3. 60, 11 = 108, 11): 
' who is to have put forth his hand, etc., and be guiltless ? ' The 
sentence is of a type that must be carefully distinguished from that of 
Job 9, 4 Obf ;i V^K r\^pr\ ^D Who (ever) hardened himself [as a fact] 
against Him, and escaped sound? Dt. 5, 23 (it is cited wrongly 
in GK. § 112^1). Comp. Tenses, §§ 19. 2; 115 (p. 115). Still, in 
spite of the parallels, it is probable that a *• has fallen out after ^O, and 
that we should read rh^'' ""O. 

10. DX i^'j 13 here cannot, as often, introduce the terms of the oath ; 
for this (with DK following) would yield a sense the very opposite 
of what is required, viz. Surely Y. will not smite him ! D^« ""^ must 
therefore be construed together, though not in the manner adopted 
by Th. Ke. (^Except Y. smite him, or his day come, etc., far be it 
from me to put forth my hand against him ') ; for this both implies 
an un-Hebraic inversion of principal and subordinate clause, and 
yields an improbable sense : David cannot have meant to imply that 
if one of these contingencies happened to Saul, he would then be 
ready to put forth his hand against him. Either DN ""3 must be under- 
stood to have the force of surely (as above, 21, 6), or (Ges. Dr. Weir) 
the negative (such as usually precedes it) may be supposed to be 
suppressed : (minime ego Saulum caedam,) sed Deus caedat eum : 
cf. II 13, 33 Kt. (minime,) sed solus Amnon mortuus est. 

1JS3''] by some sudden stroke, cutting him off prematurely 
(25, 38. II 12, 15. 2 Ch. 13, 20 al.), lOV denoting what would be 
considered a natural close to his life. 

nSDJ] not ' perish' (EVV.), but be swept away ; see on 12, 25, and 
cf. 27, I. 

XXVI. 8-1 6 207 

m"" TXorb'O'z] The position of HDn^oa gives freshness of expression, 
and force, to the new alternative. In ll' David has in his mind 
a combat with the Philistines. 

11. For niiT'D, see on 24, 7 ; and for D^l^D, on 12, 23. 

inK>N"io] The accus, of place (v. 7), after IC'N, as Dt, 17, 14 "ICJ'N 
'niT^D: cf. Qor. 42, 5 l^Jli. ^ whoever is round about it, 19, 5. 
"Iji5-n3^:i] 'and let \X8 get us away:' so 12 nrb 13^^1 {Lex. 515^). 

12. ''Dt^i*"}^?] Read '•rifc'XlBD: a » has fallen out between the two 
others. The * at the end, if correct, would be the one instance in OT., 
parallel to ''D^^^ , of that letter attached to the st. c. of the fern. pi. 
before an independent word (otherwise only before suffixes) : Stade, 
§ 330b; GK. § 878. But LXX has awov: so We. may be right in 
arguing that 'the '' at the end confirms the reading VritrN"lO?D of LXX, 
instead of SnEJ* TltJ'snCD ' (so Sm. Bu. Dh.). In this case, of course, 
the anomaly will disappear. 

"""^ niDTin] a slumber so profound and unusual that it was regarded 
as sent directly from Yahweh. Cf. DTIPN m"in in 14, 15. 

13. ISyn] to the side across (cf 14, i. 4. 40); i.e. to the opposite 
side of the valley at the foot of the hill (z*. 3). 

'31 2"i] a circ. clause {Tenses, § 161 ; GK. § 156°). Cf. Gen. 12, 8. 

14. nX'ip nns ^O] in the third ps. comp. Is. 50, 9 ""jyt^l^ Nin-'JD ; 
Job 13, 19 "ilDy T"!^ Xin"iO {Tenses, § 201. 2): unless I am mistaken, 
no parallel in the second ps. occurs in the OT. (the sentence Is. 51, 12 
is framed differently). 

15. ?N niDtJ'] In z'. 16 py. An unusual construction: yet see Pr. 
6, 22 "yhv "lOK^n "]23:^3, and {oi watching in a hostile sense) II 11, 16. 
(In i/^. 59, 10 niDTN "yh^ ^ty, as in v. 18, must certainly be read.) 

16. 'y\ ih "W^] See on II 2, 5. 

DD'^Jls] the plur. of 'excellence' (GK. § 124'); cf. Gen. 42, 30. 

nnsv riNl] If the text is correct, riN must be explained either as 
marking the fresh subject (see on 17, 34), or (Sm.) as an accus. under 
the governing force of "•&? : but the last expl. especially is unsatis- 
factory. We expect either DNI , . . nx or '«N1 . . , 'N. As the time 
is night, riN is improbable (We.) after nX"l ; it seems best, therefore, 
to regard riNl as an error for ''NT, due to a scribe influenced involun- 
tarily by the recollection of iiNI at the beginning of the sentence. 

2o8 The First Book of Samuel, 

So GK. § 1 1 7111 «. (the citation of the verse in § 117I must be due 
to an oversight). 

1 7. vtp] In Hebrew, the repetition of a word is a mode of signifying 
assent (i Ki. 21, 20) : LXX, for ''71p, express 111)1, which is used for 
the same purpose, as II 9, 2, cf. v. 6 yilV njn. 15, 15. The one is 
thus just a synonym of the other : ' the more courtly ' — that of LXX 
[cf. 27, 5 in lieu of the pron.] — 'is the less original' (We.). 

18. nj?") ''T'2~nDl] The order is idiomatic : cf. 20, 10. II 19, 29. 
24, 13; I Ki. 12, 16. Jer. 2, 5. Qoh. 11, 2. Est. 6, 3 {Lex. 552^). 

19. nmo n"!''] Cf. Gen. 8, 21 ''"'' nT*!, followed however by nn nx 
nn"'3n. Dr. Weir writes: 'HT, perhaps H^ as Am. 5, 22. Jer. 14, 12. 
Mai. I, ID.' On nanon, cf. on 2, 36. 

'y\ "1^ IDX^] For the god of the country, according to ancient 
ideas, could be properly worshipped only in his own land : hence 
banishment was equivalent to being told to go and serve foreign gods. 
Cf. Hos. 9, 3. 

Dnnx DTI^^n] With the possible exception of Ex. 23, 13, probably 
the earliest occurrence of this afterwards common Deuteronomic expres- 
sion (see LOT. p. 92, edd. 6-8, p. 99 ; or Deut. p. Ixxviii). 

20. '•''''' ''JD ijiD] Cf. "y^y^v 1330 Am. 9, 3. i/f. 31, 23. 

nnN Cyns nx] For nx, cf. on 9, 3. nnx tJ^yna appears, however, 
to be derived here from 24, 15: LXX express ^33, — no doubt 
rightly: for (i) the comparison within a comparison (to seek z flea, 
as when one hunts a partridge) is not probable ;• and (2) MT. agrees 
but imperfectly with clause a, — the ground (""a) for ni*~iX ''DT Pa^ ?X 
being only fully expressed in the reading of LXX, 'for the king of 
Israel is come out to seek my life! 

f^TT"] sc. Tl^v' (o"^ ^6' 4)- "^^^ art. in '^1'^T\ is generic, such as is 
often found in comparisons, where a class, not a particular individual, 
is naturally referred to (GK. § i26i'0): so II 17, 10 nnxn 3^3: 
Jud. 8, 18^ i^m ^:n nxna; 14, 6 ^IJn yD^b; i Ki. 14, 15 i\t -ik'ND 
D"'03 n3pn; Nu. II, 12 p:\n ns pxn NtJ'^ ncwa, etc 

Klo. for "IK>N3 would read "lU'J^, — 'like a griffon-vulture (see on II i, 23), 
(which) pursues a partridge on the mountains,' — which is adopted by Sm. Bu. 
The construction is common in poetry (e. g. Dt. 32, 11. ^. 42, 2 : Lex. 454°') ; but 
in prose comparisons are expressed either by 3 with the inf. (as Jud. 14, 6, cited 

XXVL ij-XXVII 209 

above), or by IB'iO (see ib.),~i.e. in the present case, XipHTlX -\^^T\ ^T\'' ">CN3 
□''inn. LXX KaOm KaTaStwKei u vvKTiKupa^ ev toTs opecriv, cited by Klo., is not 
evidence that LXX read "IIJ'JD : vvKTiKopa^ corresponds here to NIpH, and repre- 
sents Di3 {owl) in Lev. 11, 17. \p. 107, 6; and in Dt. 14, i7t some other bird, but 
not the "'iCJ. It is also a question, though it must be left to a naturalist to answer 
it, whether the "ICJ, or griffon-vulture, being a carrion-feeding bird, would ' pursue 
a partridge on the mountains : ' Tristram, A^at. Hist, of the Bible, p. 172 ff., speaks 
of its keen sight, and of its swooping down from afar upon a carcase (Job 39, 29 f.), 
but says nothing of its pursuit of the living animal. 

21. 'v\ mp''] Cf. 2 Ki. I, 13. 14; also \\f. 72, 14. 116, 15. 
njCTNl] Cf. 14, 24 LXX. Lev. 4, 13. Ez. 45, 20 al. 

HND T\'yyT\ njB'XI TIP^dh] The accents treat n3in as qualifying both 
the preceding words. 

22. I^J^n n^Jnn njn] Kt. 'behold the spear, O king !' Qre 'behold 
the spear of the king,' which is better adapted to the context, n being 
repeated accidentally from njn. 

23. B'W] The art. has a distributive force: i Ki. 8, 39. 18, 4. 
Gen. 41, 48t>. 

"^T?] ''It? would be more agreeable with general custom (comp. on 
19, 9): for the cases in which T3 occurs without a suffix are mostly 
those in which the reference is general (II 23, 6. Is. 28, 2. Job 34, 20 : 
similarly "T*^0 Pr. 6, 5), not, as here, specific. However, it is 
possible that T"! may have been here written intentionally, for the 
purpose of avoiding the assonance (which is here an awkward one) 
with the following n''. i Ki. 20, 42; Ez. 12, 7 (though here LXX, 
Pesh. omit T'a); 2 Ch. 25, 20 would support the text. But some 
50 MSS. have n*"! ; and it is better, with Weir and most moderns, to 
read this. 

25. ncy] used with a pregnant force, such as is more common in 
poetry: Is. 10, 13. y\,. 22, 32. 37, 5. Ez. 20, 9. 14. 22 {Lex. 794a 4), 

hy\T\ ^53^ d:i] Cf. I Ki. 22, 22 hy\T\ dji. 

27 — 31. David seeks refuge in the country of the Philistines with 
Achish. The Philis tidies resolve to attack Israel ; their army 
advances to Apheq. David is released frorn the necessity of 
fighting against his countrymen through the opportune suspicions 
of the Philis title lords: his vengeance on the Amaleqites who had 

1365 P 

2IO The First Book of Sajnuel, 

smitten Ziqlag, Saul cofisults the witch of 'En-dor. Death of 
Saul and fonathaii on Mou7it Gilbod . 

27, I. 13^ ^x] Gen. 8, 21. 24, 45; and with ^y = \>\< ch. i, 13. 

rtDDN] 12, 25 (see note); 26, 10. 

*inx D'i''] inN unemphatic as Gen. 33, 13; and (of the past) 
ch. 9, 15. (Not as Is. 9, 13 al. a single day.) 

^:i ^D 31J3 h px] can only be rendered, ' I have no good : for 
(=ibut) I must escape into,' etc. The first clause is, however, 
harshly and abruptly expressed ; LXX have ovk ean fxoi ayaOhv 
cdf juLT) aw6u>, i.e. 'I have no good tD.?SN DN '•3 except I escape,' etc., 
which is preferable. 

'JdO tJ'NIJi] a pregnant construction, occurring with this verb only 
here, but analogous to that of tJ'^inn, noticed on 7, 8. 

2. nj] If Gath was at Tell es-Sdfiyeh (see on 6, 17), some 28 miles 
NW, of the presumable site of Hachilah (see on 26, i), 

3. IT'^'D-ian] LXX '•/DIDn, in agreement with 30, 5. II 2, 2. 

4. PlpV N?"!] So Kt., the irhpf. having a frequentative force, as 2, 25 
(see on i, 7). The Qr6 substitutes the more usual tense ^p^ X?"} 
(i5) 35 ; J'^d. 13, 21 al.) : comp. a similar case in Jos. 15, 63. 

5. NJ] W belongs logically to lin'' ; but it is thrown back into the 
protasis and attached to DN, as regularly in this formula (Gen. 18, 3; 
33, 10 al.), for the purpose of indicating as early as possible that the 
speech is of the nature of an entreaty. 

6. 3?pv] Supposed by Conder to be Zuheliqeh, 22 miles SW. of 
Tell es-Safiyeh : but the consonants, except 7 , do not correspond 
phonetically, so that the identification is very uncertain. 

p?] p"^y is regularly used, when the origin of a name or custom 
is assigned (Gen. 10, 9. 11, 9 etc. : Lex. 487) ; hence the p by 1UD 
(see on 1 2, 5), though not supported, so far as appears, by any MS., 
is prompted by a sound literary instinct, and may be correct. 

7. D''C^~tn nymsi Wry^'] CDS by usage, suggesting a year : see i, 3, 
and, more distinctly, Jud. 17, 10 CJOv ^103 mC'y; Lev. 25, 29. 

8. -'X'''1] Either into the higher ground on which the tribes raided by David 
lived (which would suit Gezer) ; or, in the uncertainty whether this ground was 
higher than Ziqlag, in a military sense (Now.), of an attack in general, as Jud. 20, 18. 
Is. 21, 2. Nah. 2, 2. 

XX VI I. 1-8 211 

(Qre nnni) V"i:ni mC'jn] LXX have iravTa rbv Vea-eipi, reading, 
therefore, only one name (viz. n1t^'J^; see Jos. 13, 11. 13 LXX), so 
that the two are presumably doublets. As the better-known Geshur, 
on the £as/ of the upper Jordan, is evidently out of the question, the 
name here and Jos. 13, 2, if the text is correct, is probably that of 
a small tribe between the Philistines and Egypt (Bu. Dhorme, Kenn.). 
We. Now., preferring the other doublet, read ''1]?l', i.e. the Canaanites 
who till the time of Solomon occupied Gezer (Jud. i, 29 ; i Ki. 9, 16), 
12 miles ENE. of Tell es-Safiyeh : but this appears to be too far 
to the N. 

Hommel {Jnc. Heh. Trad. 242 f.) would read both here and Jos. 13, 2 "•"lltJ'Xn 
(cf. Gen. 25, 3 : Homm. 238-240 D"1ti'K\ corresponding to the IIK'NX mentioned 
in two Minaean inscriptions as living apparently near Egypt (p. 249 f.), and Gaza 
(p. 252) : but that X should have become corrupted into J in two passages is 
hardly likely. 

':!1 ni3B''' njn ^a] Very difficult. In the first place, the fern, is 
extremely anomalous. If the text be sound, this must be explained 
on the analogy of the usage noticed on 17, 21, by which sometimes 
a country, or the population of a country, is construed as a fem. : but 
no case occurs so extreme as the present, in which the fem. is used 
with immediate reference to a gentile name, expressed in the masc. 
And even the poetical use of n^JJ'i'' (noticed ibid^ is not extended to 
the plural. Nevertheless, as the text stands, nothing remains but 
to explain the passage in accordance with this poetical usage, and to 
render (with We.) : ' For those were the populations of the land 
from ' etc., — the gender of ^"^^ being naturally determined by that of 
the predicate (nuti^) following. But this extension of a purely 
poetical usage is extremely improbable : and what we should expect 
is simply 'y\ jnxn "i3::'r nron •'3. In the words which follow, n'w'X 
':i DpiyJO, there is a further difficulty. "]XU is used regularly to denote 
the direction in which a land or tract of country extends (15, 7 al. ; 
similarly in INU IJ? Jud. 6, 4 al.) ; hence (since ' as thou comest to 
the land which is of old ' yields no suitable sense) it follows almost 
of necessity that in Dpiyo must lie concealed the definition of the 
limit in the opposite direction. LXX in Cod. B exhibits a doublet 
twice over (0.770 dvT^KovTwv [apparently = 0?^^] 17 ciTro TeXa/xij/ovp 

p 2 

212 The First Book of Samuel, 

\_= DPy again + "Titi*] TeTetxKr/xivwv [clearly a second representative of 
"I1K' zfa//]) ; but the reading TeAa/x, found in many cursives ^ in place 
of TeXaix, points to Q?t3fp for u^'V^ — 'for those vi^ere the populations 
inhabiting the land which is yrom Telam as thou goest to Shur, even 
unto the land of Egypt.' From Jos. 15, 24 it appears that Telam 
(pointed there 0^9) '^^^ ^ place in the Negeb of Judah (see on v. 10), 
seemingly towards the border of Edom : in ch. 15, 4 it is named as 
the spot where Saul assembled his forces before attacking the Amale- 
qites ; so that it would seem to satisfy sufficiently all the conditions 
required of the present verse. In form, the sentence, as thus restored, 
will almost exactly resemble Gen. 10, 19; comp, 25, 18. Respecting 
ni^i^, see on 15, 7. 

9. np7l , . . nani] In a frequentative sense, describing David's 
custom whenever he engaged in one of these raids. Notice the impff. 
interchanging here (iTTT' \h) and in v. 11. EVV. {smote, saved, etc.) 
fail to bring this out, either here or in z'. 11. 

N3^l] Ehrl. Sl*1 : cf. 1 1 T\l N^3n^. 

10. DnD'ki'S ^x] Either we must suppose that a word has dropped 
out, and read ''^"P^* with LXX (eVt riva ;), Vulg., or, which is perhaps 
better, we must read i>? (see 10, 14) with Targ. Pesh. (J^?p, J^*?). 
The text is untranslateable. 

It is a singular fallacy to argue that because /^^ in Greek may ask a question, 
therefore PN in Hebrew may do the same : for the two words are not in the least 
parallel. M^ is a particle expressing generally the idea q{ subjective negation, from 
which its interrogative force is at once readily deduced (^^ TiQvr\K&' ; = ' he is not 
dead, I suppose f — implying that a satisfying answer is expected). 7N has no such 
general signification, but is simply a particle of dissuasion or prohibition. In other 
words, the interrogative use of ^l.f] is dependent upon an element in its signification, 
which does not attach to the particle bx at all. 

333] prop, the dry country, the root 3133 (^''23, «a.^) to be dry is 
in use in Aramaic (e.g. Gen. 8, 13 Onq. N''D 13133). Hence, from the 
dry country Kar efoxV beiiig ori the South of Palestine, the word 
acquired generally the sense of South, and geographically was applied 
in particular to a district in the S. of Judah (see Gen. 12, 9 RV. 

^ Te\afiif/ovp XI. 44, 55, 71, 106, I20, 134, 144, 158, 245; TeXa\jjovp 29; re 
Aafxif/ovp 64, 119, 244 ; T€ Aajjupow 74 (from Holmes and Parsons). 



Scale of Miles ?'■•?? ^ ^ 

Roads Heights in English feet.' • Railways 

By permission of the Palestine Exploration Fund 
and of Messrs. John Bartliolomew & Co. 

XXVII. g— XX VI I I. 3 213 

marg. ; Jos. 15, 21-32, where the cities in it are enumerated. In 
RV. in this special geographical sense, always with a capital S : e. g. 
Jos. 15, 19, Is. 21, i). See Negeb in EB.; and H.G. p, 278 ff. 
Here other districts in the same neighbourhood are called the Negeb 
of the Yerahme'elite, and the Negeb of the Qenite, from the names 
of the clans settled upon them (cf. 30, 29 'the cities of the Yerah- 
me'elite and of the Qenite'): in 30, 14 also we have the Negeb of 
the Cherethites, and the Negeb of Caleb; and in Jud. i, 16 (MT.) 
the Negeb of 'Arad (9 miles S. of Ma'on). Yerahme'el was the name 
of a clan allied to that of the Calebites (cf. on 25, 3): both were 
afterwards absorbed into the tribe of Judah ; see i Ch. 2, 9 [read 
Caleb~\. 25-33. 42. The Qenites were connected with the 'Amaleqites, 
15, 6; Jud. I, 16 (see on ch. 15, 6) : cf. EB. i. 130. 

11. The athnah would be better placed at *in, what follows 
('J1 "IDDK'D riDl) being obviously no part of the speech, but the remark 
of the narrator (so Now.). It must be admitted, however, that 
*in ntJ'y to, and 'ji IDS^^'O njl, naturally go together: it is better, 
therefore, either to omit "lON? (Vulg. Sm. Dh. Ehrl.) or to read for 
it t*>''3N^ (Klo. Bu.): 'J1 HK^J? n3 will then be all the words of the 
narrator, n^ with a subst., as Is. 20, 6. Jer. 23, 29. 

12. C'''N3n] X\i. put forth an ill odour {\\i. 58, 6: GK. § 53'i) against 
= be in ill odour with (cf. 13, 4). With a transitive force Gen. 34,30. 

D^iy nay^] Dt. 15, 17. Job 40, 28; cf. Ex. 21, 6. 

28, I. N:»n TlX "la] ''n^« has some emphasis: cf. II 19, 39 TlX 

nnoD i3y\ Gen. 43, 16 nnnva ^^'^yAr\ i^^n'' ■'rix ^d. 

2. p?] in answer to the remark made by another, as Gen. 4, 15. 
30, 15 [where LXX, not perceiving the idiom, render ovy^ ourws: 
comp. on 3, 14]. Jud. 8, 7. 11, 8: Lex. 487a. 

nns] LXX, Vulg. nny rightly. Comp. II 18, 3; I Ki. i, 18. 20. 

•'^'Nni? ncc^] LXX apxia-uin-aTo^vXa^, — the title of the chief of 
the royal body-guard under the Ptolemies. See Deissmann, Bible 
Studies, s.v. 

3-25. Saul co7'tsults the witch of 'En-dor. This section (which 
forms an independent narrative) appears to be out of its proper place. 
In 28, 4 the Philistines are at Shunem (3^ miles N. of Jezreel) ; in 29, i 
they are still at Apheq (in the Sharon, Jos. 12, 18), and only reach 

214 "^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

Jezreel in 29, ii. The narrative will be in its right order, if the 
section be read a/ler ch. 29-30. V. 3 is evidently introductory. 

3. nSD"'l] wailed, — with loud demonstrations of grief, in the manner 
of Oriental mourners. So IStpp; cf. Mic. i, 8 Cin^ nDDD T\^V^, 
with allusion to the doleful cry of the jackal. The rend, mourn, 
mourning for ISD, HSDD, is altogether inadequate : the words are 
never used of merely sileitt grief. See further the writer's note on 
Am. 5, 16 (in the Camb. Bible). 

ITySl] The waw, if correct, must be explicative (GK. § 154* wo/^): 
' in Ramah, and that in his city.' But such a construction is very 
unusual, and probably 1 has been introduced by error (GK. /. <r.) : it 
is not expressed by LXX. However, niDna n''y3 rather than noia 
n"'y3 would be the usual order, i, 3 LXX. II 15, 12. Jud. 8, 27 
{ib. 20, 6 is rather different). Both the perfects in this verse have 
a pluperfect sense (see on 9, 15). 

"l"'Dn 7lN{J'l] Aflfi? removed; see on 9, 15. 

D'^jyT'] See Lev. 20, 27 ('a man or a woman when there is in them 
'•jyT'l 31S'), which shews that the term properly denotes not a wizard, 
but the spirit — whether the term means the knower, i. e. the wise spirit 
(Ew. vielwisserisch), or (W. R. Smith) the acquaintance, i.e. the 
'familiar' spirit, at the beck and call of a particular person — supposed 
to inhabit the persons in question. See further the Avriter's note on 
Dt. 18, II (p. 226). 

4. DJ1t^'] Now Solem, near the E. end of the Plain of Esdraelon, 
448 ft. up the sloping S. side oi febel Nabi Dahl (also called Little 
Hermon), 3^ miles N. of Jezreel. The Philistines had thus penetrated 
into the heart of Northern Palestine, more than 60 miles from the 
northernmost of their cities, 'Eqron. 

y3^n] Gilboa', now febel Fuqtl'a, is the ridge running to the SE. on 
the S. side of the Vale of Jezreel (see on 31, 7), 5-12 miles S. and 
SE. of Shunem. 

7. 31N vhv^ ntJ'N] An instance of what may be termed a suspended 
construct state — ntJ'N, not less than 717^3, being determined by 21K, 
but the genitive which determines it being deferred, or held in 
suspense, by the introduction of the parallel H/yi. So in the common 
phrase , , , 02 nhn3 Is. 23, 12 ; 37, 22 al. ; and in poetry occasionally 

XXVIII. 3-14 215 

besides, as Dt. 33, 19 ^in ''JiDt: "'JDb'; Job 20, 17 K'm ^^m nn3 : Ew. 
§2890; GK. §l3oe. 

"in pyi] Now Enditr, a small village, 3^ miles NE. of Shunem. 

8. ''ipiDp] The Kt. has the fuller form of the imperative, as Jud. 9, 8 
naiprp. ^. 26, 2 •"•Si"'^; in each case the Qre substitutes the ordinary 
form, GK. § 46c. For ""pDi?, see GK. § lob. On the probable method 
of divination originally expressed by DDp, see Lex. s.v., or the writer's 
Deut. p. 223 f, 

9. ••JJ?n\n] Twenty-three MSS. have CiyT^n ; and it is true that the 
D may have fallen out before the D of ;d. The plural would have 
the advantage of greater symmetry with ni3Xri (cf. v. 3. Lev. 19, 31 al.), 
and is probable, though not perhaps absolutely necessary, as ''JJ;^^"I 
may be taken in a collective sense. 

nc?] See on 19, 17. 

10. T'P''] With dagesh dirimens. It must have become the custom, 
as the OT. was read, to pronounce the same word or form, in different 
passages, with a slightly different articulation, which is reflected 
accurately in the varying punctuation. Here the dagesh dirimens 
has the effect of causing the p to be pronounced with peculiar dis- 
tinctness : cf. Hos. 3, 2 v'Til?!!; Ex. 2, 3 iJ''SSfn 15, 17 tJ'^JipO (in which 
.cases the dagesh involves the softening of the following 3 and ■^), etc. : 

GK. § 2oh. 

12. h^\'a^'\ Six MSS. of LXX, Perles, Bu. Now. Ehrl, ^IXB'. 

13. 'y\ DM^n] The position of DM^X before '•jr'NI shews that it is 
the emphatic word in the sentence. 

D^^y] with the plur. partic. ti^rh'^ seems naturally to mean gods 
(i.e. here superhuman beings, spirits): in this case, therefore, as Saul 
in z'. 14 asks 'What is his form.-'' we must suppose that though the 
woman says she saw more than one figure, Saul in his anxiety inquires 
only about the one in whom he is interested. Sm. Bu. Now. Dh., 
less probably, think that DTiPK is a honorific plural (GK. § 124^-'), 
and denotes 'a god' (so GK. § 132I1 note), the pi. D^i?y being merely 
a grammatical plural, like Q''^n in □"'"'n D^ni?N (GK. § 132^) of Yah we h 
(17, 26 al.). 

14. ^^yo] such as was worn by Samuel, 15, 27. On LXX opOiov 
(1PJ for iP.J), see Wellh. p. 13; Aptow. ZA W. 1909, p. 246 f. 

2i6 The First Book of Samuel, 

15. n^pj Before a guttural (other than n) "^9? is usual (see on 
19, 17): but n^^ occurs so 5 times noted by the Massorah {Lex. 554*). 

•"jnTa^n] Cf. the same word, of disturbing a tomb, in the Tabnith 
Inscr. 1. 7 (Introd. § i): also Is. 14, 9 ^N> nNlpj5 -^ nn^ nnnt? ^i^5^. 

"•^yD id] Cf. z'. 16. Dyo is, however, more natural in this con- 
nexion (16, 14. 18, 12): for in Jud. 16, 19. 20 the use of ?y?D is 
evidently determined by the fact that Samson's strength was regarded 
as resting upon him in his hair, in Nu. 14, 19 (cf. Neh. 9, 19) it is 
determined similarly by the figure of the shade, and in ch. 16, 23 
by the common thought of a spirit coming on a person (see v. 16). 
Here probably py denotes the idea of protecting accompaniment (cf. 
j/r. no, 5 "jro"' ^y; 121, 5 ^J^D1 T ^y); and byo *nD expresses the 
cessation of this. 

by?0 is used in several idiomatic applications ; not only as signifying from 
attendattce on (comp. on 13, 8. 17, 15), but also_/r(?/« attachment to (Jer. 2, 5 
•"byrD Ipn-I; 32,40 "i^yD mo Tl^n^; Ez. 6,9''^y» no D3?; 8,6; 14, 5; 44, 10); 
y^w companionship with (Job 19, 13) ; fro7n adhesion to (2 Ki. 17, 21 ; Is. 7, 17 ; 
56, 3 ; Hos. 9, I ; and twice, for the more usual fD, in the phrase niNDH ?yD "ID 
2 Ki. 10, 31. 15, 18) ; from standing over or beside (Gen. 17, 22. 35, 13 : cf. 18, 3. 
42, 24); from being a burden upon (see on 6, 5. 20), esp. of an army retiring from 
a country, or raising a siege (see the passages from 2 Sam. 1-2 Ki. cited on ch. 6, 
20; and add 11 10, 14. Jer. 21, 2. 37, 5. 9. 11). 

nsnpNl] Very anomalous: Ew. § 228<'; Stade, § 132; GK. § 48d; 
Konig, i. 608, who suggests that the -^ may be due to dissimilation, 
after the preceding unusual -^; cf. on 21, 2. Read nX"]pSJi. 

16. 'j'ly liTil] Is there a Hebrew word ">y with the signification 
adversary ox enemy r" The common Heb. 1)* (root "il)*) corresponds 
to Arabic JJ to harm (Qor. 2, 96. 3, 107, etc.): and this (according 
to rule^) corresponds to the (isolated) Aramaic "IJ? Dan. 4, 16. The 
same word may also possibly be found in i/^. 139, 20 — the Psalm 
is a late one, and is marked by several other Aramaisms — but this 
cannot be affirmed with certainty, the verse being a difficult one, and 

* The supposition that the form is 'conflate,' from N1p^s1, and H^pNI, is not 
probable : ' and I met ' does not suit the context, nor does"^ Nip in' Qal mean 
to ' meet.' 

* See on 1, 6 (p. 9 footnote). 

XX VI I I. 1S-17 217 

probably corrupt. At any rate, philology forbids imperatively the 
assumption of a Hebrew word '^V adversary, the equivalent of "l^ ^ 

Can, however, a sense, suitable to the context, be rendered probable for "IJ?, from 
any other source ? (a) Symm. renders avri^-qKos aov, and in Arabic .li {med. i) 
means actually to be jealous or a rival (,5Jlc = i53p Ex. 20, 5 Saad.; l«oLi.J = 
^rfKovn I Cor. 12, 31 Erpen.). Still there is no other trace of this root in Hebrew: 
nor would the idea of Yahweh's becoming Saul's rival be probable or suitable. 
(3) Ges. Keil seek to explain "ly by a reference to Arabic Lc (^med. u)fei-buit (one 
of many meanings), impetutn fecit, spec, excursione hostili adortus fuit (aliquem), 
IV (Lane) Ic jLcl to make a raid ox p-edatory incursion upon (comp. 13, 17 
note) : 5 Ic a raid or hostile incursion : hence, the cognate subst., it is supposed, 
would properly have the sense of aestus (so. doloris, curae, sollicitudinis), whence 
in Hebrew T'y Hos. 11, 9 aestus irae ; Jc. 15, 8 aestus doloris [this explanation 
of "1"'y is, however, very uncertain: see Lex. 735''; and vay Jeretiiiah, p. 360 f.]. 
But the sense of hostility expressed by the Arabic root is, it will be observed, 
a special and derived one : is it likely, or indeed credible, that from a root meaning 
ferbuit a simple participial formation should have acquired the definite sense of 
enemy ? The etymology proposed is well intended : but it cannot be said to have 
probability in its favour. 

It follows that if "iiy has here the sense of thy enemy, it must be an 
example of a strong and pronounced Aramaism, such as, in pre- 
sumably early Hebrew, is in the highest degree improbable. Only 
two alternatives are open to us. Either "jny is an error of transcrip- 
tion for "^^.i? 2 (cf. in that case, for the thought, Lam. 2, 4 ; Is. 63, 10), 
or, with LXX and Pesh., nH""'^V '''"'^'' 'and is become on the side 
of thy neighbour' must be read (cf. T). with reference to David, v. 17, 
and 15, 28, and for the thought 18, 12 "iD i?"iKtJ' nyoi iisy nin^ r\\r\ •'3). 
lyn Dy is accepted by most moderns (Th. Hitzig, Noldeke, Gratz, 
Reinke, Kp., Dr. Weir [' LXX seems to be right ']), Now. Dh. : 
Klo. Sm. Bu. prefer "jiv. 

17. ii? /'i £:>y>l] 'And Y. hath wrought /i?r himself, according 
as' etc. Or, if "jyi ny be adopted in v. 16, the suffix may be 
referred naturally to nyi {for him). However, the point of the 

* Nor can this be the meaning of "ly in Mic. 5, 13 (AV.) or Is. 14, 21. 

2 It is possible that this was read by Symmachus. At least di/r4(,'?yAos as used 
elsewhere in the Greek Versions expresses the root lli* : Lev. 18, 18 LXX ; ch.\, 
6 LXX (Luc). 2, 32 Aq. (but ^. 139, 20 Aq. for "jny). 

2i8 The First Book of Samuel, 

sentence lies in what is done to Saul, rather than what is done to 
David : so, in all probability, ^^ to thee, expressed by 5 MSS., LXX, 
Vulg., is the original reading (so Sm. Bu. Now. Dh.). With 17^ 
comp. 15, 28. 

18^. For the order of words, see Tenses, § 208 (i). So v. 19^. 

19. In MT. clauses a and c are almost identical; and the verse 
is decidedly improved by the omission of one of them, and by the 
adoption in b of the reading of LXX, viz. D^^D3 ^^J? ^^3ni nns nna 
'j1 D3, i.e. (immediately after v. 18) ' To-morrow thou and thy sons 
tvith thee will he fallen ; yea, also, the camp of Israel will Yahweh 
give into the hand of the Philistines.' As We. remarks, a is out of 
place where it stands, neither D3 nor "i^y being properly understood, 
until after it has been said that Saul himself has fallen. 

20. 'inJO''l] LXX ecnrcva-ev, not only here, but also in z;. 21 for ?n33 ; 
so doubtless they read the same in both verses. A man would not 
(actively) ' hasten ' to fall down : bnzijl is thus more suitable than "lOP!!* 
"in^?l (Klo. Sm. Dh.) does not seem to express the right nuance. 

21. "'S33 '•K'SJ D''B'Nl] 19, 5. 

23. 1^'nS''l] '^"IQ is translated pressed in II 13, 25. 27 and urged 
in 2 Ki. 5, 23, but elsewhere break forth, burst forth, etc. Ought we 
not to read ^^{D?' (Dr. Weir). So 20 MSS, (de Rossi, App. p. 39), 
Sm. Now. Dh. ; Bu. (either so, or flS a ' Nebenstamm ' to "iVS). 

24. . . . HK^xh] Cf. on II 3, 7. 

p3"lD] 'four times, always connected with ^aj?: Jer. 46, 21. Am. 
6, 4 p3"iD "lino Dvjy. Mai. 3, 20. The root is not found elsewhere 
in Hebrew, but in Arabic JjJ firmiter alligavW (Dr. Weir). 

insni] for inssni : cf. on 15, 5 ; and GK. § 68^ 

29, I. p2N] Probably (see on 4, i) some place in the Plain of 
Sharon, commanding the entrance to the Plain of Dothan(f. 32° 24' N.), 
and so the route up to Jezreel and Shunem (28, 4). 

D''3n] ' were encamping ; ' not ' pitched ' (EVV.), which would be 
^Jn^l. Contrast 4, i (=ijn). 

^Ny"lP2 "itJ'N pyn] Generally supposed to be 'Am fdlud, at the foot 
of Mt. Gilboa', on the N., if miles ESE. of Jezreel, and looking 
across the Vale of Jezreel to Solam, the Philistine position (28, 4), 
4 miles N, by W., and 568 ft. above it. 'Jezreel' will denote 

XXVIII. iS—XXIX. / 219 

here, not the town, but the Vale {31, 7). As Ehrl. remarks, however, if 
py means a spring, Heb. idiom requires ?y (Gen. 16, 7. Jud. 7, i al.), 
not 3, so that a genitive would seem to have fallen out (cf. ^t^ PV^ 
II 17, 17). 'En-dor, however (LXX, cod. A and other MSS.), on 
the NW. slope of J. Nabi Dahi, and 4 miles behind the Philistine 
position, is too far off to be probable. 

2. Dn3y (twice)] were passing by. The participles suggest the 
picture of a muster or review of troops taking place. 

mXD?] according to, by hundreds: ? as II 18, 4. i Ki. 20, 10 

hhw'y. Jos. 7, 14 Dn3:^. 

3. WCi^ nr] not 'these days' (EVV.), except as a paraphrase : HT is 
here, as in many similar phrases, D^.py? n't, CDyQ "ib'j; rrj^ etc. an 
adverb, meaning properly here (cf. i^.^?) : see Lex. 261^. So in 
D"'Jki' nt. D"'Jtt' is, however, strangely indefinite; and as CD"" suggests 
dijyear (on i, 3), it is probable that 0^0^^ two years should be read, 
with LXX {^€VT€pov tros), Bu. Sm. Now. Kitt. Ehrl. 

1/33] LXX adds Trpo? ^e = v^ or vV? which is needed. Falling 
gives no sense : falling to me agrees with the usage of (^y) AS ?S3 
elsewhere (Jer. 21,9. 37, 13 al.) to fall over to = to desert to. The 
nearer definition cannot, as Keil supposes, be supplied from the 
context. (Dr. Weir agrees.) 

4. it] It is remarkable that in v. 9 TV'^'^ is used for exactly the 
same movement. It seems that the narrator must here allow the 
Philistines to speak from the Israelite point of view (cf. v. 6, where 
Achish is represented as swearing by Vahweh), who would ' go down ' 
from the mountainous country of Judah to fight against the Philistines 
in their plains, and so might say nt3n^D3 TT" quite generally (cf. 
30. 24). 

JDb*?] ' as a thwarter or opposer,' viz. of another man's purposes ; 
cf. the same word in II 19, 23; i Ki. 11, 14. 23. 25; also Nu. 
22, 22. 32. I Ki. 5, 18. So lubri is in the OT. the name of the 
angel, whose function it is to oppose men in their pretensions to a right 
standing with God (see A. B. Davidson's note on Job i, 6 in the 
Camb. Bible ; and the writer's note on Zech. 3, i in the Century 

5. See i8, 7; and cf. 21, 11. 

220 The First Book of Samuel, 

6. ^3] after the oath, as 14, 39. 

7. DvD'2 "I?] as II 15, 27. The usual expression is Dl^ti'^. 

8. "JT'K'y no o] '"3 states the reason for a suppressed (Why do you 
say this?): it recurs in a similarly worded expostulation, i Ki. 11, 22. 
2 Ki. 8, 13. 

''n''^^ "itJ^X OVD] As We. remarks, we should expect naturally either 
fTT'jri Di>rp (Jer. 36, 2 : cf. II 22, i, Dt. 4, 15), or, as would be more 
usual, ^ni\n Di>?? (j;. 6, r/z. 7, 2. 8, 8. II 13, 32 etc.), or (Di*n'i'?) Di^ntt 
'^ry'^^J) "IK'X (II 19, 25. I Ki. 8, 16. 2 Ki. 21, 15). However, cr may 
have been conceived as being in the construct state before 'it^'N 
(GK. § i3o<i), and so defined. At least "WV^ D1'' recurs similarly, 
Jer. 38, 28, and (in late Hebrew) Neh. 5, 14. But DVriD would 
certainly be better. 

TiDn^Jl] The ivaiv being consecutive, the tone should properly be 
milrd ""riDDbJI : but it is held back by the distinctive accent zdqef, as 
happens occasionally (Dt. 2, 28: Ez. 3, 26: Tenses, § 104). As 
a rule, only athnah and soph-pasiiq imply a sufficient pause thus 
to hold back the tone of i and 2 sing, pf with waxv consec. 

9. DM?i< ^X?Dd] The same comparison, in popular speech, II 14, 
17. 19, 27. 

npyj Here (contrast v. 4) the Philistines speak from the point of 
view which would be natural to them, when they were invading the 
high central ground of Canaan (e. g. Jud. 15, 9. 10), cf. v. ii^. 

10. 'y\ nnyi npaa n^'^n nnyi] 'And now, rise up early in the 
morning, and also the servants,' etc. The text may in a measure 
be defended by 25, 42. Gen. 41, 27. Nu. 16, 2^. 18b; but the 
sentence halts considerably, and the omission of the pronoun before 
nayi is contrary to standing Hebrew usage, when the verb is in the 
imperative (e.g. Gen. 7, i. Ex. 11, 8. 24, i). LXX, Vulg. express 
rightly nri{« before H^yi. The only parallel to the present passage 
would be Jer. 19, i ; but there also it can scarcely be doubted that 
the reading of LXX is what Hebrew idiom requires, viz. ^JplO jyinppl 
'y\ Dyn . In this verse, further, clauses a and b are nearly identical : 
but, as We. observes, the repetition of the same thought would 
become perfectly natural, if only words of different import separated 
the two similar clauses. Such words are expressed in LXX (after 

XXIX. 6~XXX. 3 221 

"jnX), viz. /cat TTopevecrOe ets tov tottov ov Karia-Trjcra ^/aSs ckci* koI Xoyov 
XoLfxov fJirj 6fi<i iv KapSto. crov, on dya^os cv ivMTTLov fiov := Q^T^Pni 

••JSp nriS. The sentence is in style and form thoroughly Hebraic, 
and may well be assumed to have fallen out accidentally in MT. 
Aot/tos is often the rendering of bv^l (e. g. 25, 25): for the combina- 
tion of "i2T and bvbl see Dt. 15, 9 (where they occur in apposition). 

Ehrlich proposes "ip2n ny 2^ (followed by nnx) for npan DDB^n 
(keeping otherwise MT.). 

)J?'\] Unusual. The normal construction would be Driapi!]! 037 "ilXI 
(on the analogy of Gen. 33, 13 inroi inn DV Dlpsni, 44, 22 a?yi 
nt3"l V3X, etc.: Tenses, § 149); but cf. 2 Ki. 9, 2. ii>< is, of course, 
the verb: Gen. 44, 3 "ilN *lp3n ; and, of the eyes, ck. 14, 29. 

II. lijy] Viz. from Apheq in the Sharon {v. 11). ' Jezreel' is here, 
not the town, but the Vale (as v. i). 

30, I. i^pv] David goes back to the city which Achish had given 
him ; see 27, 6. 

^P^Dyi] Read with LXX p!?J3y: cf. v. 18; and the note on 15, 6. 

3:j] Unless (Now.) Tnan or (Ehrl.) 2^3 has fallen out {v. 14), we 
must read 3J3n (Bu.), in conformity with usage, except when aj3 
denotes merely the southern quarter of the compass. 

2. r\2 yc'H D'-B'Jn ns] Read with LXX (cf, RV.) TlNI Ci"'B'Jn-nx 
n3 Ts^'N"^3 : we thus obtain a suitable idea to which to refer the 
following i'ltnyi ppn ; see also v. 3 (DHTmi Dn''m). 

B'^S in''nn xf'] A circumstantial clause, connected don^vSertos with 
the clause preceding, and defining /lozv ^2^^) was effected, viz. 
(Anglice) 'without slaying any.' Cf. Gen. 44, 4 ^ "I'^yn nx IS^f 
ip'-miT ; Jer. 7, 26b; 20, \^ (see RV.): Tenses, § 162; GK. § i56f 

1jriJ''l] of leading captives, as Is. 20, 4. 

3. n:ni] without suffix {Tenses, § 135. 6, 2), as v. 16: cf. on 10, 11. 
13D*J] zf^r^ taken captive. n'W is to take captive, n3K^3 to be taken 

captive : TQl is to go into exile, n73n to carry into exile. The 
distinction between the two words should be noticed. Though they 
may be often applied to the same transaction, they denote different 
aspects of it : TV'i migration from one's own country, exile, n2ti^ 
capture by another, captivity. The rendering of nvJ in Jud. 18, 30 

222 The First Book of Samuel, 

by 'captivity' (EVV.), instead of 'exile,' has led to strange misunder- 
standings of the meaning, — as though, for instance, the word referred 
to the Philistine dommation ! 

6. nni? n^ni] The fem. as Jud. lo, 9: cf. Jer. 7, 31 nn^y N^ 
n^ ^y; Mic. 3, 6 r\y^T\; Am. 4, 7 (unusual) T'onn; i/^. 50, 3 
*TK» myb'J: Ew. § 295a; GK. § 144b This use of the fem., 
especially with words denoting a mental condition, is particularly 
common in Syriac: "^ Isj1.'», "^ %J^^ "^ >u^T (Noldeke, 
Syr. Gr. § 254). 

17pD7 . , . nrON] 'spake of (AV.) stoning him : ' or with the sense 
of 'thought' (25, 21), as Ex. 2, 14. II 21, 16 in niDni? -i»N''1; 
I Ki. 5, 19. 8, 12: comp. Ez. 20, 8. 13. 21. 1/^. 106, 23. 7 "IDX 
in the sense oi command occurs II i, 18. 2, 26 : but more frequently 
in later books, especially in Chronicles, as I 13, 4; 15, 16; Est. 
I, 17, etc. (comp. Ew. § 338**^). 

mo] mU'elifjY^. § 15^ «., p. 60), and consequently perf. from TiD, 
not fem. of the adj. "id. For the use of the root with L^'^3, cf. on 
I, 10; and add II 17, 8. Job 7, 11. 10, i. 21, 25. 

pTniT'l] i.e. took courage: cf. 4, 9. II 10, 12; and similarly in Qal 
(Jos. I, 6. 7 al.), and Pi'el, 23, 16 (see note). 

8. P11"ix] Though n can be dispensed with (11, 12), the parallel 
IJJ^xn supports the reading P|*nNn (so many MSS.) : cf. 14, 37. 23, 11. 

nnj] of a marauding or plundering band: see 2 Ki. 6, 23. Hos. 
6, 9. LXX here (mis-reading) yeSSoup : elsewhere rightly Trei/jariyptov 
(Gen. 49, 19 ; xj/. 18, 32), or fxov6t,(avoi (2 Ki. 5, 2. 6, 23 al.). 

9. "llb'^n bn3] The name has not been preserved : and as the site of Ziqlag is 
uncertain, and we do not know what the point was which David desired to reach, 
any identification is very precarious. If Ziqlag was at Zuheliqeh (on 27, 6), 
W. esh-Shert'a, 4 or 5 miles to the S., would no doubt suit : but that is all that 
we can say. 

10. 1152] only here and v. 21. 

12. D"'pOV . . , n^m] See on 25, 18. 

inn ^KTll] The spirit (of life), which seemed to have left him, 
returned, i.e. he revived. So Jud. 15, 19. 

13. 'h ^3y] See on 16, 18. 

Twb^ DVn] See on 9, 20. Here D"'D'' must be understood, or read. 

14. 33 J IJDt^s] ?y, which is expressed by LXX, must have acci- 

XXX. 6-1'] 223 

dentally dropped out. t3tJ'3, when an object follows, is always 
construed with py (or the alternative 75<); and here the restoration 
is still more commended by the two ^y following. 

''r\'X:iT\ 3JJ] A district in the south of Palestine (see on 27, 10) 
inhabited by the "Tna, who, from a comparison of v. 16'', appear 
to have been closely connected with, if not a sub-tribe of, the 
Philistines. In poetry the name is used synonymously with Philistine : 
Ez. 25, 16. Zeph. 2, 5. A contingent of '•man formed afterwards 
part of David's body-guard, II 8, 18. 15, 18. 20, 7 (cf. OTJC^ 
p. 262). It is quite possible that the name may be connected with 
Crete : the Philistines themselves are expressly stated to have been 
immigrants from Caphtor, i.e. Crete, Am. 9, 7 (see also Gen. 10, 14, 
where in accordance with this passage onnQD riNI should no doubt 
be transposed so as \o precede DTlJr^a Dt^^O IX^"" IK^S). 

mv<h •^t^'N] i.e. the min"' njj of 27, 10. 

3^53 23J] mentioned only here. A district of the Negeb, occupied 
by a detachment of the Caleb-clan (see on 25, 3). 

15. ""Jimnn] So V. 16. 

16. D"'::m] Ki. nnDti'a p-iD"i3Di pTTsai \''^^^'^r:i nnib. Whether, 
however, the sense of dancmg is really expressed by the word is very 
doubtful. Modern lexicographers only defend it by means of the 
questionable assumption that J3n may have had a similar signification 
to J'ln, which, however, by no means itself expresses the sense of 
to dance, but to make a circle Job 26, 10: in Syriac (PS. col. 121 7) 
circumivit, especially, and commonly, with ^^, circumivit utvitaret=- 
reveritus est, cavit. The Aram, a^n to dance is of course an altogether 
different word. It is best to acquiesce in the cautious judgement 
of Noldeke [ZDMG. 1887, p. 719), w^ho declares that he cannot with 
certainty get behind the idea of a festal gathering for the common 
Semitic Jn. Here then the meaning will be ' behaving as at a Jn 
or gathering of pilgrims,' i.e. enjoying themselves merrily. 

17. DniriD?] of their following day. The expression is unexampled. 
Read probably D^inn^ (We. Bu. Now. etc.), or (Ehrl.) Dnnn_n, which 
is better (after D3''1, as Jud. i, 17), though it does not explain the 7. 

ny3 li'"'}^] used collectively — after the numeral. So V^\T\1 myj 
Jud. 21, 12; It.'y "vyp. I Ki. 20, 16; Jud. 18, II. 17I'. Cf. on 21, 6. 

224 "^^^ First Book of Samuel, 

19. i5^t^•?21] The zaf^ef should stand rather on mill. But probably 
the word is displaced, and should follow 7n:n, as in LXX. 

Dn^ inp^] The reflexive b, as Gen. 15, 10. Lev. 23, 40. Am. 6, 13; 
and often in the imper. ^!?"^p Gen. 6, 21. 14, 21 etc. {Lex. 515^). 

20. ':■) ijnj] The text is evidently in disorder. The least change 
that will suffice for the requirements of style and sense is to read 
for ''izh Mn: with Vulg. VJS^ 13nJ''"l 'and they drave ie/ore him that 
cattle (the cattle viz. named in clause a), and said, This is David's 
spoil.' But LXX, Vulg. do not express in after np^l, and for njpDn 
Ninn LXX have rwv o-kuXwj/ i.e. ^^{^D, the variation seeming to shev/ 
that both are alternative (false) expUcita, added after VJ27 had been 
corrupted into ''JS^. It is quite possible, therefore, that we should 
go further, and with We. Now. Dh. read the entire verse thus: 

nn \h^ nr \'-\'atx>'\ \>i^ unn -ipnm |Nxn-b-nx inp''i. This text states 

undoubtedly all that the verse is intended to express, and states it 
at the same time more naturally and simply than the reading pre- 
supposed by the Vulg. 

21. n^CJ'JKn DTIND] 'the 200 men;' cf. Jud. 18, 17^: GK. § 134I. 
ti-iy^S] It is better to vocalize, with 6 MSS., LXX, Pesh. Vulg. Bu. 

Sm. Now. Dh. D3^'^"'1 (the subject being David). 

'31 C*3''l] nx can only mean with (on 9, 18), and Dyn can be only the 
'people' just mentioned (cl.*) as being with David. On the other 
hand, the men left behind would be the ones to ask for the welfare of 
those who had gone into the battle (We. Sm.);. and this agrees with 
22, where the men who reply are those with David. The context 
requires imperatively DI^B'^ DH^ 'h^^'"\ DJjn W IC'ri (Ehrl., with We. 
Bu. al.). in is the false 'explicitum' of an original C'n = 1tJ*J''1 
(Introd. § 5. i): 1{i>ri is the natural sequel of 21b nn nsnp^ IXV^I : 
for ns LXX have tw?, and 7 MSS. i?N: LXX have also rjpwrrjvav 
for ba^^'^). 

22. ^y^ni yn] For the adj. + subst. (GK. § 131c), cf Dt. 25, 15. 
■"isy] The group regarded as a unity, and spoken of accordingly 

in I ps. sing. The usage is thoroughly idiomatic ; and there is no 
occasion, with Gratz, Die Psaimen, p. 134, to substitute lioy. See on 
5, 10: and add Gen. 34, 30 nSDJD Tiro ''3N1; Jud. i8, 23 '•3 ip'nD 
npytJ (of Micah and his neighbours). 

XXX. i()-2'] 225 

23. "lE^'N DN] Ewald (§ 329a : comp. Hist. iii. 145 [E. T. 105]) 
would treat the words introduced by nx as an exclamation, explaining 
nx as an accus. with reference to a suppressed verb, — (Think of) that 
which . . . ! and comparing Hag. 2, 5, where, however, as also in 
Zech. 7, 7, the text is very uncertain. LXX for iti'X nx TIN express 
""^^ "'in^, which is no doubt right (We. Bu.) : ' ye shall not do so, 
after zt'>^a/ Yahweh hath given unto us, and [Tenses, § 76a) preserved 
us,' etc. 

24. nrn nm^] Cf. on 8, 7a. 

, . , 31 . . . a] A variation for the more common type, 3 , , . 3 : 
Jos. 14, II. Ez. 18, 4. Dan. 11, 29. Ez. 42, 11 f. (Smend)t. 

25. n^yDi] as 16, 13. 

DDB'D?! pTh~\ Cf.Ex. 15, 25. Jos. 24, 25 ; and pn alone, Gen. 47, 26. 
Jud. II, 39. 

26. iny-i^J 'to \i\% friends: IH^. (for l'"'"'^- : GK. § 91^) attached 
to 2iplur. as 14, 48 ^nob' (Stade, p. 355 ; GK. § pi^). In this order, 
however^ the double 7 is scarcely Hebrew, though milT' '•JpT? inyi7, 
with the more general category first, would be possible, LXX inyn?^, 
followed by Sm. Klo. conjectured Qn''"lVr ^y ^^^^^ ^^^^^^ (^^^ v.i"] ff.); 
so Bu. Dh. : but the correction is rather violent. 

n3"i3] =^z. present ; see on 25, 27. 

27. 7N~n''3] i.e. not the better known Beth'el, 10 miles N. of Jerusalem, but 
the place in the Negeb of Judah, called Baie^K in Jos. 15, 30 LXX (MT. corruptly 
^5^03), hn3 in Jos. 19, 4 MT., and bv^T3. BaeovTjK in i Ch. 4, 30, in a list of 
cities belonging originally to Simeon (Jos. 19, 2-8, i Ch. 4, 28-33), but afterwards 
incorporated in Judah (Jos. 15, 26-32). The name has not been preserved; and 
the approximate site can only be inferred from the known places with which it is 
associated in this list, Beersheba, Moladah (very possibly — see £B. s.v. — the 
Malatha of Euseb. Onom., 4 miles from 'Arad, now Tell 'Arad, 17 miles S. of 
Hebron, and 20 miles E. of Beersheba), Hormah (also near 'Arad ; see on v. 30), 
Ziqlag, and 'En-Rimmon (now, probably, Umm er-Runidmin, 10 miles NNE. of 
Beersheba). LXX have here BatOavp ; but the situation of mifJT'l (Jos. 15,58 al.), 
4I miles N. of Hebron, is less suitable than that of bX"n"'3 (We.). 

333 r\'\12~\] Ravioth of the South: see Jos. 19, 8, in the list of Simeonite cities 
(333 np"1). LXX here also read the sing. : 'Pa//a j'oTot; = 333 riDT The site is 
unknown {DB. iv. 198*; Buhl, 184). 

"in''] in the hill-country of Judah (Jos. 15, 48), mentioned also by P as a priestly 
city (Jos. 21, 14=1 Ch. 6, 58 [EVV. 73], t- According to Euseb. O^iom. 266,43, 
a large village 20 miles from Eleutheropolis. It is now generally identified with 

1365 Q 

226 The First Book of Samuel, 

'Attir, a village situated on two knolls, 1 1 miles S W. of Ziph. The change from 
^ to y is explicable (Kampffmeyer, ZDPV, xvi. 45, cited by Cheyne, EB. s.v.) : 
LXX have remarkably here (but not elsewhere) VtOOop (="iny; see p. 136 «.). 

28. lyiy^] LXX have here a double rendering: uai rots hv 'ApoT|p koI roh 
'AjAjxaSei. ' It is clear that LXX after iy"li? ( = 'AufiaS) read still another letter, 
viz. n. The form n"li)iy, now, is confirmed not only by Jos. 15, 22 ^ — where, to 
be sure, LXX conversely omit the H — but also by the present pronunciation 
'Ar'drah'' (We.), the name of a place in the Negeb of Judah (Jos. I.e.'), 11 miles 
SE. of Beersheba: see Robinson, Bibl. Res., ii. 199*. 

niDDtJ*] Only mentioned here. Site unknown. 

yDJTiTN] In the hill-country of Judah (Jos. 15, 50 [MT. here nbnC^Nf]), men- 
tioned by P as a priestly city (Jos. 21, 14=1 Ch. 6, 42 [EVV. 57]), mentioned 
also I Ch. 4, 17. i9f. Now probably the large village es-Senm' , 10 miles S. by W. 
of Hebron, and 4 miles W. by S. of Ma'on. The form of the name is noticeable ; 
it is the inf. of the Arabic 8th conjug. ; and it seems therefore to shew that the place 
must have been originally an Arab settlement. Eshta 51 is another name of the 
same form. See further Burney in thejourn. of Theol. Studies, 1911, p. Ssf., who 
supposes plausibly that the names suggested originally the ideas of being heard, and 
asking for oneself, and that they marked the seats of ancient oracles. 

29. 73"I3] LXX 7J^'^D3; no doubt, rightly. Carmel, now el-Kurmul, was 
in the hill-country of Judah (Jos. 15, 55), 4 miles NE. of es-Semu', and 3 miles S. 
of Ziph. See further on 25, 2. 

vSDn"l\T ^iy] cities belonging to the Yerahme'elites settled in the Negeb : 
see on 27, 10. 

iJ^pn ny] See on 27, 10. 

30. HDin] In the Negeb of Judah (Jos. 15, 30), but originally Simeonite 
(19, 4. I Ch. 4, 30): mentioned also in Nu. 14, 45 = Dt. i, 44; Nu. 21, 3. Jud. 
I, 17 (two divergent traditions of the origin of the name); Jos. 12, i4t. In 
Jud. 1,17 the original name of Hormah is said to have been Zephath. The site is 
unknown ; but Nu. 21, i. 3 appear to shew that it was not far from 'Arad (see on 
V. 27). The identification of Zephath with Sebaita, 27 miles SSW. of Beersheba, 
is precarious, the names not agreeing phonetically. 

(B'yini] This, not }tJ>y"'nD2, found in many edd., is the Mass. reading: the 3 
is recognised both in the Brjpaa^ee of Cod. B, and the Bojpaaav of Cod. A. The 

^ MT. myiy. But T and *1 in the old Phoenician characters are seldom 
distinguishable, and the context alone decides which is to be read. In proper 
names, unless the orthography is certain upon independent grounds, either letter 
may often be read indiscriminately. 

* The identifications given here in the RV. with marginal references (taken over 
from edd. of AV. with marginal references) are extraordinary, Beth-el in z*. 2 7 is 
identified with the Beth-el N. of Jerusalem ; and 'Aro'er with the 'Aro'er N. of the 
Arnon, on the E. of the Dead Sea ! Those responsible for these 'references' might 
have learnt better from the Speakers Commentary on Samuel, published as long 
ago as 1873. 

XXX. 28—XXXL 2 227 

place may be the same as ftJ'y of Jos. 15, 42 (in the Shephelah). 19, 7 (Simeonite). 
If this is the case, it will have been situated approximately in the same region as 
"jDJ? (see the next note). 

■jny] In the Shephelah (Jos. 15, 42); and mentioned in the same group with 
Libnah (site unknown), 'Ashan (see the last note), Nezib, now Beit Nazib, 2 miles 
SW. of Qe'ilah (see on 23, i), Qe'ilah, Achzib (perhaps 'Ain el-Kezbeh, 2 miles NE. 
of esh-Shuweikeh = Sochoh ; see on 17, i), and Mare'shah {Merdsh, 6 miles W. of 
Nezib). Its site cannot be more closely determined. It *is called in Jos. 15, 42 
MT. iny, but in LXX ^Dl? ('Wa/c). In 19, 7 on the contrary both have "inV. 
A decision between the two variants is not possible ' (We.). LXX (B) Noo, other 
MSS. No^/3e (Luc. "Saye^); hence Klo. would read 33y (Jos. 11, 21), still the 
name of a place 14 miles SW. of Hebron, while Gu^rin thinks of Nuba, 8 miles 
NW. of Hebron, near Qe'ilah (I 23, i). See Cheyne's art. Athach in EB. 

31. P"13n] In the hill-country (Jos. 15, 54). The most important town of the 
entire district, where David, shortly afterwards, was first proclaimed king (11 5, 3). 

31. The chapter is excerpted, with slight variations, by the compiler 
of the Chronicles (i Ch. 10). The variations are partly, it seems, due 
to accident, partly they are to be attributed to an intentional change 
on the part of the compiler of Chronicles, partly they have preserved 
the original text of the passage in a purer form than it has been 
transmitted to us in Samuel. 

1. n^on^j] C. lon^j. 
''ti'JN ion] C. t^'-N d:''"!. 
yn^jn] C. ya^:. 

2. Ip^'l^l] See on 14, 22. 

VJ3 HNi h\m? nx] C. vn nnxi ^inb^ nnx. ^'''r\r\ sq. accus. 

occurs here, II i, 6. Gen. 31, 23. Jud. 18, 22. 20, 42t; """ins X''"T^'^ 
occurs in the parallel, i Ch. 10, 2. ch. 14, 22. Jud. 20, 45t. 
pi^in sq. accus. means undoubtedly to overtake (so p''21N often in Targ. 
for both X>'''y^^ and 3''t?'n, as Gen. 44, 4. 6) : but ' overtake ' is a relative 
term; and in II i, 6, vv. 7-10 shew that the archers had not actually 
come up to Saul. We can hardly therefore say (Bu.) that '""ins must 
be here the original reading. 
}n3in^] C. fn:v. 

3"JJ''2N] wrongly identified in RV.;«. here, and on i Ch. 8, 33, with ME^', 
14, 49 : in I Ch. 8, 33 = 9, 39 Saul's four sons are given as Jonathan, 
Malchishua', Abinadab, and Eshba'al ; and there can be no doubt (see 
on 14, 49) that ''IB''' corresponds to Eshba'al. Eshba'al (cf. II 2, 8) 
was pretty clearly not present at the battle. 

Q 2 

228 The First Book of Samuel, 

3. nr^n^m naani] Cf. Jud. 20, 34 nnna nnn^Dni; is. 21, 15 i^bT 

^iNC i'N] C. hNCJ* l^y. 

ins^D"'!] not 'overtook' (EVV.), hnl found htm in the fight (Now. ; 
Bu., comparing i Ki. 22, 30-34). XVD io find — Xo hit (Ehrl.), might 
be said of the weapon (Dt. 19, 5), but hardly of the archers. 

DK'pa D^tJ'JK Dniron] C. nti'pl Dninn. The rendering of LXX, 
however [ol aKovTia-rai, ai'Spes To^drai), appears to presuppose D''ti'3X ; 
though, as it is difficult to construe riK'pa CCJ^JN together — ' men with 
the bow' being hardly a Hebrew construction — the word must be 
misplaced. Probably the order nc^pn (Bu. nniD) nmon CC'JS ' men, 
shooters with the how '=:some shooters with the bow, should be 
restored. Comp. D^J^'i?? D''K'3^? Gen. 37, 28; ^y^^n'm Q'<^2ii Dt. 13, 14; 
and for the art. 25, 10. Sm. Now. Dh. would omit riK'pn W^iii, as 
a gloss explanatory of DHian : Bu. (alt.) would read as C. 

DniDHD 1XD ^mi] C. Dnr.TjD bm. 

bw)] from ^"'n(^in), 'zvas in anguish from (Ru. i, 13. Is. 6, 4. 
28, 7 : Lex. 580a) the archers.' But b^T\ is confined elsewhere to 
poetry or elevated prose ; ""Jao for p would be the regular construc- 
tion : and the sense does not seem strong enough. Read probably, 
with LXX (irpavfiaTLcrOr]), PW and was wounded by the archers (p with 
the passive verb, as Gen. 9, 11. Nah. i, 6. Job 24, i : Lex. 580*). 
What LXX eis Ttt vTToxovSpia presupposes is uncertain : ti'^n is 
rendered in LXX (II 2, 23. 3, 27. 20, 10) \J/6a. 

4. Nt^'J^] C. NCrl^N. 

*?I'^11] C. omits, — as it seems, rightly (We. Bu. Ehrl. etc.). What 
Saul dreads is mockery while alive, not mutilation after death, which, 
indeed, would not be prevented by his armour-bearer killing him. 

••3 v^ynni] and wreak their caprice upon VL^Q-=mock or abuse me. 
See on this word Fleischer ap, Delitzsch on Is. 3, 4, who compares in 
particular the Arab. i_> JJl«j prop, to engage o?ieseIf with, then to 
entertain, divert, amuse oneself with, in Heb. in a bad sense, to make 
a toy of to abuse or mock. See Nu. 22, 29 ; Jud. 19, 25 : and (where it 
is apphed anthropomorphically to Yahweh's treatment of the Egyptians) 
Ex. 10, 2, and above 6, 6. 

5. nin-^v] C. mnn-^j?. loy] C. omits. 

XXXI. ^-g 22g 

6. nn"- Ninn nvn r::'jN-i53 dj rb Nt:':i] C. ino nn"* in^n-^ai — 
a generalizing abridgement of the text of Samuel. LXX in Samuel 
do not express VK'JX i?3 DJ. VB'JK will mean the men specially 
about Saul (23, 25. 26), not the whole army (the ijN"i5:'> '5J>JN, v. 7 
second time). 

7. ^KOX] C. C'^N-b. 

p-i\n -layn n:^'xi poyn -inya -iej'n] C. P»W itrx (for the six words). 
The pi^y — a wide avenue running up between hills (see on 6, 13) — 
is the i^xynr prsy (Hos. i, 5), i.e. the broad vale running down from 
Jezreel, on the N. of Mt. Gilboa, in a SE. direction, past Bethshe'an 
(12 miles from Jezreel), into the Jordan valley {H. G. 384 f., 357 f. ; 
EB. s. V. Jezreel). The sense of the text appears therefore to be 
that the Israelites dwelling on the other side of the pty^ (i. e. on the 
N. of it), and (more than this, even) on the other side 0/" Jordan, fled 
through the panic. p"iM "I3y3 is used regularly to denote the 
territory east of Jordan. The statement respecting pTH "i2yi "lt^'^< 
may be exaggerated : but we are hardly in a position to question the 
correctness of the text; and ^'?.y2 (twice) for nnya (Klo. al.) is a 
somewhat violent emendation. 

■•31.,. '*3] So, whether in the sense of that or because, Gen. 29, 12. 
33, II. Ex. 3, II. 4, 31. Jos. 2, 9. 7, 15. 8, 21. 10, I. Jud. 6, 30. 
ch. 19, 4. 22, 17, II 5, 12. I Ki. 2, 26. II, 21. 18, 27 al.; and even 
(though this can hardly be reputed an elegancy) ''31 . . . ^onI? 
Gen. 45, 26. Jud. 10, 10. The remark of Stade, p. 14, that '•31 is 
' unhebrSisch,' can be due only to an oversight. 

i?^?-lti''' "-trix] C. omits. nnyn-nx] C. Dnny. |na] C. ana. 

8. v:3 nc'^tj^-riNi] C. vj3-nxi. 

y37:n] C. ynpj (as v. i). Except in these two passages of Ch., 
always with the article. 

9. vba-nx iDE^D"! iB'Ni-nN imaM] c. ik'kitin inc^m inL3"'*j'D''i 

5inp^^1] The object can be only the head and armour of Saul (cf., 
for the sense of the Pi^el, 11, 7. Jud. 19, 29). It is a question 
whether the word should not be pointed Qal inpK'«i^ in which case 
the meaning would be that they sent messengers throughout the land 

230 The First and Second Book of Samuel, 

of the Philistines. And tliis would agree with the aim of in^K'''1, viz. 
to tell the tidings (iB^a?) to their gods and people. 

Dn''3Vy rr-a] C. Dn"'3^y-nx. nx ('to acquaint their idols with the 
news') is (We.) much more original than n''3 ('to announce the 
tidings in the house of their idols '), is supported by LXX here, and 
agrees with the nX") following. So Bu. Sm. Now. 

10. nnntj'y n^n] C. nr\'^rh^ n^n.—nhPify n^3 will hardly be the 

pi. of nnriK^y~n"'3, as Keil suggests, on the analogy of nut< n^3 
(Ew. § 270C; GK. § 1241"): in all probability the frequency of the 
plural in other connexions (e.g. 7, 3.4. 12, 10) led to the sing, 
mnti'y here being incorrectly read as nnriK'y. LXX ci's to 'Atrrap- 
Tctov. It is, no doubt, this temple of the Phoenician goddess 'Ashtart 
(see on 7, 3) in Ashqelon, which Herodotus (i. 105) mentions as 
T^s ovpavLr}<s 'A<^po8tTijs TO Upov, and which, as he tells us, his inquiries 
shewed him to be the most ancient foundation of the goddess : the 
one in Cyprus (probably at Kition), he adds, was reported by the 
Cyprians themselves to have been founded from Ashqelon, and that 
in Cythera [Paus. iii. 23. i] was built by the Phoenicians. The 
proper name of a native of Ashqelon, compounded with mnt^y, 
occurs in an Inscription {CIS. I. i. 115): ^J^JpC'N mnti'ynay p DtJ' : 
in the Greek parallel text 'AvTiVaTpos 'A(f)poStaiov 'Ao-/<aX[(ovtTTjs]. 
The head of Astarte also appears on certain coins of Ashqelon {BB. 
i. 169, n.f). Here, 'Ashtart seems to have had the character of 
a martial goddess, of which there are other indications ; see Ashtart 
in E7icycl. of Rel. and Eth. ii. 116 ; Ashtoreth in DB. i. p. 170*. 

\^ nn ncina lypn irT'irriNi] C. )in rr-n lypn "inb^rnNi. On 

the originality of the text of Samuel, and against the view of Ew. and 
Bertheau that the original text embraced both readings, see the 
convincing note of We. '3 ypn is to strike or fix in, as a tent-peg 
or nail, Jud. 4, 21. Is. 22, 25, a dart, II 18, 14: it may also have 
denoted to fasten to, even though the object fastened was not itself 
actually ' struck ' in. We. Gratz (i. 439), Bu. and most follow 
Lagarde ^ in reading '^'!i\>'P^ ; but as it is uncertain what exactly this 

^ In his instructive Anmerkungen zur Grieck. Uebersetzung der Proverbien 
(1863), pageiv. 

XXXL g-I. I 231 

denotes (see on II 21, 6), and as on the only two other occasions on 
which it is used, it refers to the livmg body (Ehrl.), it may be doubted 
whether it is safe to restore it here. 

itJ'"n''3] So z'. 12. II 21, 12: elsewhere J^?lp"n''3 ; in the Greek 
period called Scythopolis ("^kvOwv ttoXis; Jud. r, 27 LXX, 3 Mace. 
12, 29), now Beisdn. An important fortress, standing on a natural 
mound, artificially strengthened by scarping the side, and commanding 
the entrance from the E. up the Vale of Jezreel, and so into N. 
Palestine generally (/T. G. 357 f. ; EB. i. 566 f.). For long after the 
entry of the Israelites into Canaan, and no doubt even at this time, 
it was held by the Canaanites (cf. Jud. i, 27. Jos. 17, 11). 

11. ny^3 ^^y ^:i^^ V^n] C. nyb ^"^l" b- V^N is very intrusive. 

icj'N ns*] c. 'w^-\>'2 nx, 

12. n^-^n-b i3^''i] C. omits. inpM] C. ink^-'I. 

nh.3 . . . n>13] C. ns^a . . . nsia. (nsiJ only here in OT. A word 
belonging to Aramaic and the later Hebrew.) 

JK> jT'a nr^ino] C. omits. 

r\^y^ !|N3»i] C. HB'n^ DlX^?p..— Probably 1NT1 here should be 
vocalized ^N3*ii (so LXX, Pesh.) : the suffix, though added by the 
Chronicler, is not needed (see e.g. 16, 17). 

Dt^ Dns 1Qlb'''l] C. omits. 

13. nap^i on'TiDvmN* inp^i] C. Dn^ni?3vms nnp'^i. 
nti'n-n ^c'xn] c. ^y^i rh^r\. On nt^an, see on I 23, 15. 

lOVl] C. IDIVI. {Vv. 13-14 in Chronicles are an addition, made 
by the compiler of Chronicles himself, and exhibiting throughout the 
marks of his style : cf. LOT} pp. 526, 535 ff., Nos. 3, 40.) 

II 1 — 5, 16. Lament of David over Saul and Jonathan. David made 
king at lielron over Judah, and subsequently, after the murder 
of Ishbosheth, over all Israel. Capture by Joab of the strofighold 
of Jebus, which David henceforth makes his residence. 

1, I. iC^"*! , , , 2'^ Tni] a circ. clause, = 'when David had' etc. (as 
RV.) ; cf. I Ki. I, 41 (^Tenses, § 160; cf. GK. § 141®, though here 
the cases quoted are of a ptcp.). \T1 is resumed (see on I 25, 26) by 
V. 2 TI^I, and the main sentence is continued by 'y\ njm. 

232 The Second Book of Samuel, 

p^rsyn] is altogether isolated, the art. being used only with the 
gentile name. According to usage elsewhere, either p7Dy (LXX, 
Vulg. ; cf. 30, I note. 18) or ^^y:i'^r\ (6 MSS, Pesh.) should be restored 
(We.). So Dr. Weir : ' Is it not V^^^^ ? ' 

2. ^it^tr oyo] nyn as I 14, 17. itj>Ki \>^ nmxi as I 4, 12^ 

4. "lann nNn-no] I 4, 16^. On ie;>n, see on I 15, 20. 

na"in] Almost = D^^l. Strictly, of course, n3"in is an inf. abs. 
in the accus., qualifying 72:, lit. ' with a much-making there fell' 

6. TinpJ Nlpj] The inf. abs. as I 20, 6. N"ip3 is for nhp;, verbs 
T\"\> and N'^b being not unfrequently confused (GK. § VS'"'^). 

li.K'J] ptcp. : was zVz the conditioji of one leaning = was leaning. 

CK'lDri 'h]}2] bv2 means owner, possessor (as n''3n i?j;3, "ll&'n ^yn) : 
so D"'£i'1Bn vyi would mean owners of the horsemen (but not captains, 
or getierals, of the horsemen [= LXX hnrapxa-t], which would be 
D"'tJ'"lEn nb') ; and D''5i'"iSn '•byn would mean owners of the {war-)horses 
(on the confusion in MT. between K'"]S horse [pi. ^V"!?], and J^ISl 
(for 5:'^? [GK. § 84^1^]) horseman, pi. D^n-?^ see Z^o:. s. v.). If the 
text is correct (see on v. i8), we must point D^B'lSn '•pyj^ and suppose 
it to be an unusual expression for horsemen. 

8^. "irDX''l] Qre "'Pi>^,1,, evidently rightly. So Zech. 4, 2. Neh. 5, 9. 
7, 3 {Ochlah w^Ochlah, No. 133). 

■•^JN] ;;zz7V/ in pause; see on I i, 15. 

9. "linnD")] and despatch me (I 14, 13. 17, 51). 

^'^K^n] Only here. What exactly is denoted cannot be ascertained. 
The root denotes some kind of interweaviiig (Ex. 28, 39) : ,jl^-iJ is 
quoted by Freytag, apparently as a rare word, in the sense of ' per- 
plexus fuit {de arbor ibus).' It is not apparent what meaning, suitable 
to the present passage, a derivative from such a root might express. 
The Versions afford no real help. LXX o-ko'tos Seivov (perh. a. 
corruption of a-Korohivo^, dizziness; Trendelenburg, ap. Schleusner, 
cited by Sm.) ; Targ. NnTll terror; Pesh. ).j>or dizziness (PS. s.v.); 
Aq. (who renders the root Ex. I.e. by o-vacfiLyyio, cf. 28, 13 nV3C'D 
o-<^(yKT^pas) 6 acjiLyKTr]p } Vulg. angustiae. Moderns generally suppose 
the word to denote either the cramp (Ew. Th. Ke.) or giddiness (as 
though properly a coiifusion of the senses), so Ges. Klo. RV. marg. ; 
the exact meaning cannot be determined. 

/. i-i8 


'^1 '•ti'DJ niy"?3 '"3] A singular expression, an inversion, as it would 
seem, for the normal ''"ki'DJ ?3 IIJ?, which, to judge from its recurrence 
in almost exactly the same form Job 27, 3 "'I TiDC'J niy"P3"''3, was in 
use in Hebrew in this particular expression, being intended probably 
to emphasize the ^D. Hos. 14, 3 py NtJTi"?!, if the text be sound, 
must be similarly explained : but the separation of a word in the 
co7istr. St. from its genitive by a verb must be admitted to be wholly 
without analogy in Hebrew, and to be less defensible than its separa- 
tion by a word like l^y. 

TO, innnCNI] The i ps. impf. Pi'el, with waw con v., pointed 
anomalously w'wh paihah : so Jud. 6, 9. 20, 6 (see Tenses, § 66 note; 
GK. § 490). 

vDJ] Elsewhere vCJ. The peculiar punctuation is attested and 
secured by the Massoretic note pTTl^ pj; cf. GK. § 61^. 

mjJi'Nl] my^'N, as Nu. 31, 50. The omission of the art. in such 
a case as the present is, however, very unusual, and hardly to be 
tolerated (I 24, 6). No doubt, substituting the other form of the word 
(Is. 3, 20), we should read with We. 'T]y^*L''!. 

12. ^nIl^^'' n"'a ^yi mn^ oy hvi\ Tautologous. Either read with 
LXX min^ for nmv or (We. Bu. Now, Ehrl.) omit '1 rT-a i?j;i, 
supposing this to have been added, as necessary for the sense, after 
nin'' had been corrupted to min'' . 

13. '•pPDy ~|3 K'''N] 'an Amalekite ger (or protected foreigner):' 
nj U'^X like N''3: tr'N, |n3 B^"'N, etc. {Lex. 36a top; GK, § 131^). On 
the ^/r, see DB, s. v., or the writer's note on Dt. 10, 19, or Ex. 
12, 48 : 'stranger' is both an insufficient and a misleading rendering. 
See also Strange, Stranger, in DB. 

14. n'^IJ'D] See on I 24, 7. 

16. T^"]] Q^^ ^^i^ ij^ accordance with predominant usage (i Ki. 
2, 32. 37). However, the correction seems a needless one; for the 
plural also occurs, as Hos. 12, 15 ; Lev. 20, 9. 

"•^Jn] Notice the emph. pronoun. 

18. nc'p] was formerly supposed to be the name given to the 
following Song, from the fact that the word occurs in it somewhat 
prominently in v. 22 : 'and he bade them teach the children of Judah 
the Bow! But there is no analogy or parallel for such a usage in 

234 '^^^ Second Book of Samuel, 

Hebrew; and n:^p standing nakedly — not HK'pn DT'C^, or even 
nc>pn"nx — is not a probable designation of a song. Ew. supposed 
T\^\> to stand as in Aram, for tDK'p (Prov. 22, 21 ; cf. Dan. 4, 34), 
and to be used adverbially = correctly, accurately. But the word 
is rare in Hebrew, and — however written — appears to be an Ara- 
maism, such as would not probably have been used here : moreover, 
the word in Aramaic means always truth, truthfully, not accurately. 
We. holds the word to be an intruder ; and offers an ingenious theory 
to account for it : ' Perhaps, as a correction on D''K>"13 in v. 6, there 
may have been attached to the text, in agreement with I 31, 3, the 
words nti^p vy3, of which, as v. 6 and z". 18 may have stood opposite 
to one another in two parallel columns, vy3 may have found its way 
into V. 6 before D''K'"lS, and DK^p into v. 18. By the adoption of this 
explanation, both verses at once would be relieved of an encum- 
brance' (so Now.). — With ID^^ cf. Dt. 31,22; i/^. 60 title 0030 

'\^>n'] Cf. Jos. 10, 13 (n{^'^■^ isd hv nninn s'-n x^n); and the 
original text of i Ki. 8, 13 (see LXX of v. 53, and recent Com- 

The text of v. 1 8, however, excites suspicion. Not only is flK'p intrusive, but, 
as Klo. remarks, "IfOX"'! ought to be immediately followed by v. 19 (cf. 3, 33; 
22, 2), and i8''''Jl n^lD^ iUn (on iUn without a pron. suff., see on I 16, 11) 
would form the natural sequel to 17. Upon the assumption that iS'' is misplaced, 
and was intended originally to follow 17, T\^p min'' ''32 will immediately precede 
z/. 19 ; and it has been supposed that these words really conceal the first words of 
the dirge. Thus Klo. Bu. would read for them T\^\> iTniT' ""33 (the/^-w., Judah 
being personified as a woman, Jer. 3, 11 al., called to lament, Jer. 9, 16. 19 al.) 
' Vernimm, O Juda, Grausames,' ' Hear (or Learn), O Judah, cruel tidings : ' but, 
though ntJ'p is good Heb. for hard things (Gen. 43, 7, 30), p3 does not mean hear 
or learn, but consider (Dt. 32, 7. \p. 50, 22. 94, 8), and the thought itself is prosaic. 
Sm., better, omitting ^l{^'p, proposes milT' "ip^ ' Weep, O Judah ' (for the sequel, 
in either case, see the next note). TfO?? remains, however, as an awkward and 
inexplicable residuum. 

19. '•nvn] Ew. and Stade, following Pesh., Le Clerc, Mich. Dathe, 
De Wette, 'The gazelle,* supposing this to be a name by which 
Jonathan was popularly known among the warriors, on account of 
his fleetness (cf. 2, 18; i Ch. 12, 8 innb Dnnn i?y D''X2VD). But 
there is no trace of such a name in connection with Jonathan : and 

/. l8-2I 


throughout the poem the two heroes are consistently spoken of (DmDJ 
five times), — only in vv. 25b. 26 the singer's thoughts turning more 
particularly to Jonathan, — so that it is unlikely that he would begin 
with a word that was applicable to only one of them. The text must 
therefore be rendered, ' The beauty, O Israel, upon thy high-places 
is slain.' Saul and Jonathan, the two heroes who formed the crown 
and glory of the nation, are called its beauty. The expression 
The beauty (not Thy beauty') is singular, and Ehrlich hardly goes too far 
when he says it is not possible : but LXX must have already found 
the same consonantal text. By their rendering o-ti^Awctov (= ''^Vl'), 
which agrees with the reading "JTID (see the next note but one), they 
appear to have understood the passage as an injunction to erect 
a pillar in commemoration of the two departed heroes: cf. 18, 18 
(where 3^1 is rendered kox eaTr^Xwaei') ^. 

"•Di'n being thus unsatisfactory, Klo., followed by Bu. Sm. Now., conjectures 
''Zlifl'n ' Be grieved (I 20, 3. 34; and esp. II 19, 3), O Israel,' to which miri"" ''1)2 
(above) would form an excellent parallel : the fem. (though not elsewhere used in 
poetry of Israel), as in min'' ^33. If this conjecture be accepted, '2 must of 
course be pointed ?]''riiD3 ; and the clause must be rendered, Upon thy high places 
{lie) the slain, — P^H being construed collectively (Klo. Bu. Sm.). It reads, 
however, somewhat abruptly : and ?bn as a predicate, as v. 25, would be more 
natural. Now., following the genuine rendering of LXX (see the next note), and 
omitting ??n, would read, 'Be grieved, O Israel, /tir thy dead:'' but 77V\ "1 ^V 
is strongly supported by v. 25^ (as indeed Now. owns). 

On the whole, though, in themselves, m'ln"' ''33 and PNICi'"' ''3ifyn would both 
be suitable, it is impossible to feel satisfied that they really express the original 
text. Some corruption seems to underlie ''3ifri : for the rest, it seems best, with 
our present knowledge, to leave vv. 18-19 substantially as they are, merely, with 
LXX, omitting ntJ'p va.v. 18, and, with Luc, prefixing lON^I to v. 19. 

7?n ■j"'niD3 7y] LXX has a doublet: vivkp rwv tcOvtjkotwv (= ^y 
■JTlO) i-rrl to. vij/r] crov (= MT.) TpavfxaTiwv : ' the first is shewn by the 
following ^t'w/A'z;^ TpavixanCiv, and by the divergence from MT., to be 
their genuine rendering ' (We.). 

21. y37J3 ""in] y3?jn was the name of the range, extending in the 

* Aq. and MSS. of LXX afcpi^aaai (whence Vulg. considerd) presupposes the 
same text : cf. aKpi^eia for i<3''^2 Dan. 7, 16 LXX Theod., and k^aKpi^uaaadai for 
n3X:|) Dan. 7, 19 LXX, cited by Field. 

236 . The Second Book of Samuel, 

arc of a circle for some 8 miles, and containing several independent 
peaks and heights {^EB. 1723 ; cf. DB. s. v.) : hence the pi. nn, and 
the 'sl3, which there is no reason to change (Bu. Sm. Now.) to '3lI. 
Klo., cleverly, but needlessly, y^^'J ''?"]n (Is. 44, 27 in pause) ^ Dry up, 
O Gilboa" (Is. 42, 15). So far as ^\\t form goes, y3^33 ^"^"P, is 
a fusion of two constructions ynbl D''"in and j;i73n ^in, combining 
the greater definiteness of the former with the superior compactness 
and elegancy of the latter. In such an expression as yai^ja Dnn, 
nnn is virtually qualified by y2^J3 in the same degree as if it were 
an actual genitive, and is expressed accordingly in the construct state 
(cf. Is. 9, 2 Tiri?3 m'ODl^ : GK. § 130a). 

moiin ''IB'"!] nonn is lit. something taken off from a larger mass, 
and set apart for sacred purposes ; and it seems to have been first 
used (Dt. 12, 6. II. 17) of gifts taken from the produce of the soil, 
asp. first-fruits (see more fully the writer's note on Dt. 12, 6, or his 
art. Offer, Offering, in DB., p. 588^); and fields of offerings 
is commonly interpreted to mean, fields bearing produce from which 
first-fruits are offered. But the expression is somewhat strange : 
the ridge of Gilboa', except on its S. side, is bleak and bare {EB. ii. 
1723); and, as the text stands, the verb, such as come, which we must 
understand with "IDD i?N1 ?D ?\^, must be carried on to fields, which 
it does not suit. It is a great improvement (with Klo. Now. al.) 
to insert T?..''. in a, and to omit (with Luc.) \ before "'l^ ; we then get 
a well-balanced distich — 

nionn "if n^-'^y ido bn) 

The principal suggestions made by those who are dissatisfied with 
mnnn nb> are rilDn ^-^j^ (Now. Bu., after Luc. 6pr) Oavdrov) ; Trn'f 
ni^n (Sm. Bu. alt.); n^tti nhb (Klo.), or m»*iri n'^ (Dh.: Jer. 
14, i4t), 'ye fields of decei//' — the fields on which the two heroes 
lost their lives being represented as having deceitfully betrayed them ; 
G. A. Smith {H. G. 404) nicino nb* 'ye fields o( discomfitures / ' 

^yjj] bvi is to reject with loathing, Jer. 14, 19. Ez. 16, 5 (^y3). 
45 bis. Lev. 26, II. 15. 30. 43. 44t. (Job 21, 10 Hif. differently.) 
LXX here irpoa-uyxOLo-drj (as Lev. 26, 15. 30. 43. 44: Ez. 16,45 

/. 21-22 237 

oLTToyaaixivrj). The meaning defiled is less probable : for this sense is 
only borne by "jyj in Aramaic, and is not common even there (Is. 
I, 6. 6, 5. 28, 8 Targ. Not in Syriac). 

^*^^'0 v2] ' not anointed with oil.' The shield of Saul is pictured 
by David as lying upon the mountains, no longer polished and ready 
to be worn in action, but cast aside as worthless, and neglected. 
Shields, w'hether made of leather or metal, were oiled in antiquity, to 
keep them in good condition. Cf. Is. 21, 5 IH.^ 'IHB'O i.e. prepare for 
action; and Verg. Aen. 7. 626 Pars laeves clypeos et spicula lucida 
tergunt Arvina pingui. 

vi] Used alone (except Gen. 31, 20) exclusively in poetry; 
especially to negative a subst. or adj., as Hos. 7, 8 njisn v3; Job 
8, II Dv:) "hi. 

n''ki'?3] The form expresses z. permanent state (GK. § 84 a^; KOn. ii. 
130-133): what is required here is rather the ptcp. TWO (so 
23 MSS.). An original riK'O (i.e. D^if'^) has probably been read 
incorrectly as C?'?, which ultimately became D"'^9- 

22. Jib'j] Exceptionally for JiD3 (so some 50 MSS.). Comp. |12b' 
Dt. 33, 19; y^^ I Ki. 18, 27; im^ Is. 17, 11; W ch. 18, 9; 
-m Hos. 9, 12 (MT.); nb'iB' {pdel of noc') is. 10, 13; -m ib. 
28, 2; "cy^ always (four times) in Job for DVD; ^'^'^ Lam. 3, 9; 
bpy Neh. 4, 11; bna /^ divide (bread) Lam. 4, 4. Mic. 3, 3 for 
DID Is. 58, 7 (= Arab. (_^ri /(? tear^), and occasionally besides. The 
Massorah contains a mechanical enumeration of eighteen instances 
(including some questionable ones) of words written once with ty for 
D (Mass. on Hos. 2, 8; above, p. 52 note). The converse substitution 
is rarer (p]lDr3 Am. 6, 10 ; no: ij/. 4, 'j ; 13D Ezr. 4, 5). 

Dp''"! 2Y>^n N?] z/J<?«' not to return empty. ' The figure underlying 
the passage is that of the arrow drinking the blood of the slain, and 
of the sword devouring their flesh: cf. Dt. 32, 42. Is. 34, 5 f . Jer. 
46, ID ' (Keil). 

1 But JJ>1D fo spread out — (w/-9 (according to the rule D = .flo = (^; b' = Jo = 

= J-ij). Cf. (on D12, and D"IQ, pp-jS Dan. 5, 25. 28) Nold. Z. fur Assyr. 
1886, p. 414 ff. ; and, on the phonetic rnle, Wright, Compar. Gramm., p. 59 f. 

238 The Second Book of Samuel, 

23. DD'VJni D''3ni?3n] (with the art^ are plainly in apposition with 
jn^irril /INCr, and cannot (EVV.) form the predicate. The Mass. 
accentuation is evidently at fault: we must take back the zdqefm a to 
Db''y3n, and render: 

Saul and Jonathan, the beloved and the pleasant, 
In their lives and in their death were not divided ; 
They were swifter than eagles, stronger than lions. 
1t^3 is, of course, strictly not the Eagle, but the Griffon -Vulture (see 
Mic. I, 16 ' ; and Tristram, Nat. Hist. 0/ the Bible, p. 173 f). 

24. 7X] for 7V (see on I 13, 13), as some 10 MSS, read. 
DDtJ'npDn] The suffix being conceived as the object, and not as the 

genitive (in accordance with the common construction of the ptcp.), 
in which case, of course, the article could not be employed : cf . 
'A- 18, 33 7^n iJlfXlsn, where this is clear from \hQ/orm of the suffix. 
See GK. § 116^; and on the masc. suffi § 135°. 

CJ'iy Dy] ' together with pleasures or luxuries ' (comp. on I 15, 
32), if not in particular delightful food, dainties (cf. Jer. 51, 34 
^j!nj?0 ib'-iD N^O. Gen. 49, 20 mi^P ; also, in a fig. sense, ^p. 36, 9 
Di?,fn ^'3nj? ^mi). For Dy cf. Cant. 1, ii. 4, 13. 14. 5, i; and 
Lex. 767a. It is against the usage of this prep, to understand the 
phrase adverbially = in a pleasurable manner (Keil) ; and in so far 
as D''ny are not articles of dress, they must be associated with "iJB* 
zeugmatically. The zeugma is, however, somewhat violent : hence 
Gratz, Klo. Sm. Dhorme, Ehrl. C^ID Dy with fine linen garments 
(Jud. 14, 12. 13 (see Moore, pp. 355, 377). Is. 3, 23. Prov. 31, 24t); 
G. A. Smith {H. G. 405) C^y DJ? with jewels, to which irW ny in the 
following line would form an excellent chmax. LXX jxera. koct^ov 

ifj,5,v = ranj; ny. 

n^yDil] Cf. the use of n^yn in Am. 8, 10; and the opposite 
T^yo T"iy "'"'1'"' Ex. 33, 5: also n^y in Lev. 19, 19. Ez. 44, 17. 

25b, 'Jonathan upon thy high places is slain ! ' David turns again 
to address Israel, as in v. 19. 

26. nnspSJ] The normal form would be n^????; but the case is 

1 Where the * baldness ' alluded to is the down (in place of feathers) on the neck 
and head, that is characteristic of the Griffon-Vulture, but not found on the Eagle. 

/. 2)— 11. J 239 

one of those in which a n"^ verb follows the analogy of a verb n'6, 
' the termination of the n"h being attached to it externally ' (Konig, 
i. 614: comp. pp. 610 f., 625): cf. nnszinn jos. 6, 17; inxDsn 
Zech. 13, 4 5 also niXip Jud. 8, i; niN^p Jer. 25, 12; nrN^n 50, 
20. Comp. Stade, § 143^ ; GK. § 7500. 

'h^^ 'nnariN alone = "thy love to me;" and "h is to be connected 
with the verb ' (Ehrl.), i. e. Ihy love is wonderful to vie. 

27, ncn^D 'h'2\ i.e. (figuratively) Saul and Jonathan themselves, 
conceived poetically as the instruments of war (Ew. Th. Ke.). 

On this Lament, Ewald, Die Dichter des alien Bundes, i. i (1866), 
pp. 1 48-1 5 1, should be compared. There breathes throughout a 
spirit of generous admiration for Saul, and of deep and pure affection 
for Jonathan : the bravery of both heroes, the benefits conferred by 
Saul upon his people,, the personal gifts possessed by Jonathan, are 
commemorated by the poet in beautiful and pathetic language. It is 
remarkable that no religious thought of any kind appears in the 
poem : the feeling expressed by it is purely human. 

2. I. n^ysn] with reference to the higher elevation of Judah, as 
compared with Ziqlag (1,1 f.) : so vv. 2. 3. 

3. VkTJXl] LXX D''K'JNni, agreeing better with "iDy "ItTN. 

4. "itJ>{<] Difficult. ' The men of Jabesh-Gilead are they that have 
buried Saul' is an unnaturally worded sentence, besides being 
questionable as Hebrew (D''13pn, not '\'y2.\) IB'N, would be the form in 
which the subject should be expressed : see on I 4, 16). We cannot 
be sure where the fault lies. "iCX (which is not really wanted) may 
have crept into the text by some error ; or it may be taken as = Ihat, 
as in I, 4, and, as there is no apparent reason for the emphatic 
position of nyp: ^"'2'' ^K'JN before it (see on I 20, 8), as having been 
accidentally misplaced from following "iCN? (cf. LXX ; and ""J "IDN^ 
I Ki. I, 13). Klo. would read n""lN"7y for "iDNi? (cf. Gen. 26, 32); 
Ehrl. supposes words such as ""JlDyn crm T-D b'\^^ Dy"'K>in to have 
fallen out after "iC'K. 

5. "'K'JX] LXX Tjyovfx.e.vov'i^'hv'^^ as 21, 12. I 23, II. 12; prob- 
ably rightly. i7y3 might easily be changed to the more usual ^C'JX, 
especially under the influence of v. ^. 

ninv] for 7 with the passive see GK. § 121^ ; Lex. 514^ d. 

240 The Second Book of Samuel, 

"ili'N] ye who . . . implying, however, a reason (= otVtves), and so 
equivalent to in that ye . . . Comp. 6^'. I 26, 16. Gen. 42, 21. 
i/a. 71, 19 Thou who . . .! 139, 15 / who . . . ! (Germ. Der du . . ., 
Der ich . . .). 

nrn lonn] LXX (Cod. A : B is here, for two verses, defective) 
TO eXeo? ToG Oeov = mn'' IDPI : cf. I 20, 14 MT. 

nD''3^^{] the plur. of 'majesty:' GK. § 124'. 

6. nsTn] There is nothing in the context for this word to be 
referred to. The impf. ncJ'VN, not less than the position of the clause 
af/er '}) nin'» B'y'", postulates an allusion to something y«/z/r^/ and 
does not permit the reference, assumed by Th. Ke., to the message 
of greeting sent at the time by David. The proposal of We. to read 
nnn for nxtn removes all difficulty : ' I also will shew you good, 
because ye have done this thing.' 

7. Uyi" n^pTnn] fig. for. Be encouraged : so 16, 21. Jud. 7, 11. 
Zech. 8, 9, 13. Cf. 'S T Piin I 23, 16, with note. 

^■•n '':a^ vni] 13, 28 end. I 18, 17. 

TlX DJi] For the emphatic position of ""nx, cf. on I 15, i. 

8. . . . nK>N N3^' -itJ'] Usage requires 'jl N3Vn nc' {ch. i, 10; 
I 24, 6). 

nc'3"5i'''N] Cod. 93 Holmes Bta-fiaaX; so ol XolttoI (i. e. Aq, Symm. 
Theod.) in the Hexapla ; comp. Isbalem of the Itala. See i Ch. 8, 
33 = 9, 39 bySi^J^^ which leaves no doubt that this was the true name 
of Saul's son, changed at a later period into Ish-bosheth for the 
purpose of avoiding what was interpreted then as a compound of 
the name of the Phoenician deity Baal. The change, however, was 
not carried through consistently : the original Ish-baal (i. e. man 
of Baal — a tide of Yahweh (see on 4, 4): comp. at Carthage nJn^J'N 
man of Tanith ^) remained in the two genealogies in i Ch., and here 
in particular MSS. or recensions *. 

D''JniD] on the border between Gad and Manasseh (Jos. 13, 26. 30): 

' Euting, Punische Sterne (1871), No. 227 = CIS. I. ii. 542 (n3n[:r]K). 
^ LXX has in ch. 3-4 the strange error MeficfyilBoaOe for n5J'3"v^'*X. So Lucian's 
recension throughout, except 4, 4, where the form Me/xftPaaX occurs. 

//• /-9 241 

see also vv. 12, 29. 17, 24. 27. 19, 33. Gen. 32, 3. Jos. 21, 38 
(= I Ch. 6, 65). I Ki. 2, 8. 4, i4t. 

The site is uncertain. The narrative of Jacob's route from Haran to Shechem 
(Gen. 32-33) points to a site near the ford ed-Damiyeh, such as Deir 'alia, 7 miles 
to the NE. of it (see the writer's Genesis, p. 301 f. ; more fully the Exp. Times, 
July, 1902, p. 457 ff.) : the notices in 2 Sam. seem to suggest a site further to the N. 
Thus Buhl (257 ' perhaps '), Budde (but admitting that the site seems too far from 
the Jabbok for Gen. 32), and others, think the name is echoed in Mahnd, 13 miles 
N. of the Jabbok, and 6 miles E. of Jordan, at the top of W. el-Himar (but comp. 
on V. 29) ; Merrill {East of Jordan, 436 f.) points out objections to this, and pro- 
poses Suleikhat, a large ruin 7 miles SW. of Mahna, and i mile E. of the road N. 
and S. through the Ghor [not marked in G. A. Smith's Map, but just under the 
figure 500 in this position] : this, though it would agree with 2 Sam. 18 {DB. 
iii. 213''), does not suit Jacob's route (see my Genesis, 301). Further exploration 
may discover the site of Mahanaim : for the present, as Gen. 32 and 2 Sam. point 
to different sites for it, it is better, with Dillmann, to leave it undetermined. 

9. "'"lIK'Nn] The name is recognised even by Keil as corrupt : 
for neither the Assyrians ("i^G'S) nor the Arabian tribe of D'JIB'X 
(Gen. 25, 3) can be intended; and the name of a tribe so insig- 
nificant as not to be mentioned elsewhere is not in this connexion 
probable. Pesh. Vulg. express ^I^K'an (so Th. Ew. We.). The 
situation, in agreement with the position of the name next to that 
of Gilead, would suit excellently (see Jos. 12, 5. 13, 13): but Keil 
objects that Geshur at this time (see 3, 3^) possessed an independent 
king, so that Ishbosheth could have exercised no jurisdiction over it. 
Kohler, Kp. Klo. read ^'^^^'^ (Jud. i, 32): cf. Targ. ncx JT-m ^y. 
So Nold. Bu. Sm. Now. etc. 

n?3] The original form of the suffix of 3 sg. masc. is retained in 
this word eighteen times (Is. 15, 3. 16, 7. Jer. 2, 21. 8, 6. 10 bis. 
15, 10 MT. [but read ^Jl^bp Dnb]. 20, 7. 48, 31. 38. Ez. 11, 15. 20, 
40. 36, 10. Hos. 13, 2. Nah. 2, I. Hab. i, 9. 15)^; and sporadically 
(see on 21, i) in other cases. For the position of ^3 with a suffix 
after the subst. to which it refers, giving it greater independence and 
emphasis, comp. i Ki. 22, 28 ( = I\Iic. i, 2). Is. 9, 8. Jer. 13, 19. Mai. 

* The orthography i?3 seventeen times: Gen. 25, 25. Ex. 14, 7. 19, 18. Nu. 
23, 13. Lev. 13, 13. Is. I, 23. 9, 8. 16. Jer. 6, 13^/5. Mai. 3, 9. \p. 29, 9. 53, 4. 
Pr. 24, 31. 30, 27. Job 21, 23. Cant. 5, 16. 

IS6.5 R 

242 The Second Book of Samuel, 

3, 9. i//. 8, 8. 67, 4. 6; and especially in Ezekiel, Ez. 11, 15. 14, 5. 
20, 40. 29, 2. 32, 12. 30. 35, 15. 36, 5 (N^3); and in the second 
person, Is. 14, 29. 31. Mic. 2, 12. 

Notice here ?N thrice, followed by ?y thrice, in one and the same 
sentence: comp. 3, 29. Jer. 26, 15. 28, 8; and on I 13, 13. 

10. nriN Vn] See on I 12, 14. As We. points out, v. lo^ is the 
natural sequel of v. 9, and ought not to be separated from it. The 
chronological statements of v. 10* agree so indifferently with the data 
stated, or implied, in other parts of these books, that the entire clause 
is probably a late and unauthoritative insertion in the text. 

12. n:y33] Now el-Jib, 5 miles NNW. of Jerusalem. 

13. 1N^^] LXX adds inanD: so Th. We. Klo. Bu. 

nn"*] superfluous, and, indeed, hardly possible, after DltJ'JD^I. 
Perhaps l{i'3D''1 (i.e. ^tJ'ifiM met each other) was originally written; and 
a scribe, not noticing the following nrT", read it ^tJ'2D*1 and added the 
suffix, which remained in spite of its inconsistency with nn''. 

'y\ nr» r\::i'Xir\ ^y H^n] Cf. on I 14, 4. For the 'pool' of Gibeon, 
cf. Jer. 41, 12 pyan -itJ'N D^mn D^»n. Robinson (i. 455) mentions 
remains of a large open reservoir, some 120 ft. in length by 100 ft. in 
breadth, a little below el- Jib, which may be the nD"»3 referred to. 

15. 1QDD3 nny^l] 'and passed over by number,' — nay of the 
individuals passing in order before the teller. Cf. Jer. 33, 13: also 
Lev. 27, 32. Ez. 20, 37. 

nB'3"B'^Ni?l] The 1 is not represented in LXX, Pesh. : and the 
passage is improved by its omission. 

16. ''31 I3"in")] a circumstantial clause = ' zf//y^ his sword in his 
fellow's side.' LXX, however, after K'''X express "nj, in which case 
the two clauses will be parallel : * And they fastened each his hand 
upon [Gen. 21, 18] the head of his fellow, and his sword in his 
fellow's side.' So Bu. Now. Sm. 

N"lp''l] sc. ^<■?.P^ (1 16, 4): so elsewhere with this verb, as Gen. 11, 9. 
16, 14. 19, 22 al. 

Dnvn np^n] i.e. the Field of Flints (Ez. 3, 9 ; cf. D''"}if ri3"in Jos. 5, 2 : 
Lex. 866a), or, perhaps, of (Sword-)f4?'^j {\\i. 89, 44t : but Duhm '^'^ 
here for "llif). LXX Mcpts rwv iTn(3ovku)v, i.e. (Schleusner, Ew. Nist. 
iii. 114, We.) ^''1^'] np/Tl, or rather (the root being nnif I 24, 12. Ex. 

//. g-24 243 

21, 13) D"'12fn 'n the Field 0/ the Plotters or Liers in wait, or (Now. 
Sm.) nnsn 'X\ (cf. Est. 7, 6 Heb. and LXX cod. N^-* ^g.) the Field of 
the Enemies. But C'^Sf^ ^ j/c/^j, proposed by Ehrl. in 1900, and 
independently by Bu. in 1902, seems evidently right : the place was so 
called on account of inyn T^3 I3"in K'''N. 

18. casn *TnN3] "iriN in a comparison as 6, 20. 13, 13. Jud. 16, 7. 11, 
Job 2, 10. \\f. 82, 7. 

20. nt] imparting directness and force, in the question, to nnx : so 
Gen. 27, 21. I Ki. 17, 7. 17. See Z^or. 261^. 

21. "1^ HDJ] V. 22 lb ~11D: Gen. 22, 5 Dab UK'. 27, 43 lb~n"a; 
Dt. I, 7 nab lyo. 40 d3^ ijd. 2, 13 dd^ nay. Cf. on I 22, 5. 

22. no?] LXX explicitly Iva fx-rf. See on I 19, 17. 

'31 T^l] As both We. and Dr. Weir remark, the text of LXX {koX 

TTWS apw TO TrpOO-WTTOV fJiOV TTjOOS Ioja/3j /Cai TTOU ecTTtj/ TavTa ', iTrLCrTp€<f)€ 

Trpos Ia)a/3) contains a double rendering of these words, the second for 
^3S NB'N expressing njQ n|X, and being evidently the original LXX 
rendering, though made from a corrupt text. 

23. rT'Jnn nnxa] It is doubtful both whether nnx (everywhere else 
a prep, or conj.) can mean the hinder part of a spear, and also whether 
the butt end of a spear would be sharp enough to pierce through 
a man : hence Klo. conjectured n^lilhs (Gen. 9, 23 al.) backwards 
(i.e. driving the reversed spear backwards as he ran): so Sm. Now. 
Bu. Ehrlich sees the difficulty ; but objects that adverbs of this form 
in Heb. (n''3">nx, n''jmp, and perhaps n"'3nyo; see on 15, 32) describe 
elsewhere only the manner or direction of movement, and therefore 
conjectures n^:rQ with the spear, supposing nnx to be a dittograph. 
However, we have in Gen. 9, 23l> n"'3inK DiTJSI ; and the smiting 
would imply here a backward movement with the arm (cf. I 4, 18 
JT'nnx i'SM) ; so that the objection seems hypercritical. 

tJ^nn] 3, 27. 4, 6 (but see note). 20, lof. 
Vnnn] idiomatically = ?« his place, where he stood {on I 14, 9). 
nroyi . . . t^nn ^D ••n^l] N3n ba is a ptcp. absol., exactly as I 10, 
11*: cf GK. § 116W 
riO'1] The pausal form, in accordance with the sense; cf. p. 306. 

24. ... ncni nsn t^'OCJril] A sentence of the same type as Gen. 
19, 23. 44, 3 in;"^ Q^-^'3«m -11K -Ipnn: Te7ises, §§ 166, 169; cf. on 

R 2 

244 T^^^ Second Book of Samuel, 

I 9, 5. Theod. for n^X, from a sense acquired by it in post-Bibl. 

Hebr. (as in Syr.), has vSpaywyos (hence Vulg. aquaeductus : cf. Aq. 

on 8, i) ; but were the word used as an appellative we should expect 
the art. (^o^<n). 

ntDN] Neither this place nor n''3 is mentioned elsewhere. The ' wilderness of 
Gibeon ' will presumably have been the country E. of Gibeon : but it is remarkable 
that, though there was a hot pursuit, neither pursued nor pursuers had by sunset got 
beyond land named after Gibeon, — or, indeed, if "]"n sq. gen. is to be taken in its 
normal sense (Gen. 3, 24. Ex. 13, 17. I 6, 9. 12 etc.), ' the road io ' it, — though very 
soon after {v. 29) Abner began his all-night march through the Ghor. The dis- 
tance from Gibeon to Jericho, in a straight line, is 17 miles. Geba' for Gibeon 
(see the opposite error in 5, 25) would be much more probable (so Bu.) : Geba" 
(see on 1 13, 2) is 5 miles E. of Gibeon, and a route leads from it through W. Farah 
(p. 103) directly down to Jericho. It is very possible that there is some further 
error in the text ; though it cannot be restored with certainty, rfj is a place as 
unknown as HDK, though from its being used to define the position of HDX, one 
expects it to be better known. We. supposes it to have arisen out of H ^3 (LXX 
Fat), and ''3 in its turn to be a dittograph of ^1 in '3D ; supplying a 3 he thus gets 
(y33) pV33 imm imn ""JD ^y 'in front of ( = East of?; see on I 15, 7) 
the road in the wilderness of Gibeon (or, better, Geba').' So Now. 

25^. nnx] hardly more than a: cf. i Ki. 19, 4; and see on I i, 1. 
We. Sm. Bu. al. read, however, HD^ ny23 (as v. 24). Is it, however, 
certain that the hill was the same one? notice Kip""!, implying some 
distance, in v. 26. 

26. nV37] LXX ets n/fos: see p. 129 n. 
^ TlD ny] So Hos. 8, 5. Zech. i, i2t. 

27. D^l^xn ••n] LXX mn'' (as always elsewhere, in this oath). 'As 
God liveth, (I say) that, unless thou hadst spoken, that then only after 
the morning had the people gotten themselves up, each from after his 
brother,' i.e. if thou hadst not suggested to them z;. 26 to cease from 
arms, they would have continued the pursuit till to-morrow morning. 
RV. interprets the passage falsely. For the repetition of '•3, see on I 14, 
39. TX as 19, 7. "ipariD lit. after the morning: JO as in D^pi'O, etc. 

npy3] The Nif. is used idiomatically, of getting away from so as 
to abandon (Nu. 16, 24. 27), especially of an army raising a siege, 
Jer. 37, 5- n- Cf. Lex. 749* 1 b 2. 

28. IDTT' nS] See on I i, 7 ^3Nn xh : cf. I 2, 25 lyot^' N^. 

29. n2iy3] the broad, and relatively barren Steppe, or floor of the 
deep depression {el-Ghor), through which the Jordan flows (cf. on 

//. 24-}2 245 

I 23, 24). It would be reached from Gibeon by going down to 

pinnn ^3] accus. after la^'^l (unusual): Dt. i, 19. 2, 7 (Sm.). 

pinion] Only here. The verb ~\T\1 is to divide in parts. Gen. 15, 10 (twice) f ; 
and "iri3 is a divided part (Gen. 15, 10. Jer. 34, 18. 19 t), each time, of halves of 
aninaals cut in two in making covenants. Ges. and other moderns have accord- 
ingly generally taken |1"in3 to mean properly a division or cleft ; and |"nn3n 
(with the art.) to have been in particular the ' Gorge ' leading up to Mahanaim, as 
(Buhl, 121) W. 'Ajliin (6 miles N. of the Jabbok), or (Budde) W. el-Himar 
(12 miles N. of the Jabbok), by either of which Mahanaim, if Mahna, could 
apparently be reached ; or i^H. G. 586) the ' narrow central portion of the Jordan 
valley itself.' It is not, however, stated whether any of these routes traverses 
a pass or valley of a character in some way or other so marked as to be dis- 
tinctively called pinsn. W. R. Arnold {Essays . . . published as a Testimonial 
to C. A. Brings, 1911, p. 13 ff.) argues, on the contrary, that, as piniin PD cannot 
be the direct object of IDP^I (for the accus., as a direct obj. is very rare after \7T\ , 
Dt. I, 19. 2, 7, and, \\^T\1 ?3 being definite, the absence of nx shews that it is not 
a direct obj.), it must be an adverbial diCCMS. , and that, not of place, but like v. 32 
rhhr^ b'2 d!?"''), of time (GK. § nS"), and denote all the half (sc. of the day) ; he 
then by a careful examination of vv. 24-32, and comparison with 4, 5-8, makes it 
probable that Abner would reach Mahanaim at about noon, so that the half of the 
day denoted by pim woiild be the fore-noon. The case is ably argued ; but it 
cannot be said to be established. Dt. i, 19. 2, 7 shew that "[^n may be construed 
with a direct accus. ; and nX is often omitted before a direct determined object. 
(Arnold's paper is reprinted in AJSL. 191 2, 274 ff.) 

31. ''t;':x3l] Read ''^JX3 or (with LXX) ^^'^^yp.: cf v. 15. ino at 
the end of the verse is superfluous : ti'''X . . . u?'^ being evidently the 
obj. (which is required) to l^n. The insertion in RV. of so that in 
italics is a sufficient indication how anomalous the verse is in the 
Hebrew. Th. Ke, would understand 'yif^ before iriD: but the 
omission of the relative pronoun in Hebrew prose is almost confined 
to the late and unclassical style of the Chronicler; see on I 14, 21. 
LXX Trap avTov-=:S'!^'^'9.' Ehrlich ino Xl^'^m K'W niXD ^h^, taking 
lan to mean only wounded. But Heb. historians rarely draw such 
distinctions ; and in accounts of battles riDH practically means always 
to smite fatally {Lex. 646*), exceptions being very rare (2 Ki. 8, 28 = 
9, 15: ib. 645t>e). 

32. Dn^~n''3] 9 IMSS. Dn^~n''33: but see p. -^"j foottiote 2. 

Dn? "1X*1] The expression seems a natural one ; but it occurs only 
here. Cf. D3? "lixi. (the verb) I 29, lof; "li>< "lp3n Gen. 44, 3t. 

246 The Second Book of Samuel, 

3, I. naiN] 'Job II, 9 ('"''iJP)- Jer. 29, 28. The masc. (which 
would be ^^X ; GK. § 93'^^) does not occur. LXX kin ttoXv, reading 
na-iK (n3-in); Dr. Weir, 

D''^Ti w:hr\ , . , prm i^n] See on I 2, 26. 

2-5] = I Ch. 3, 1-3. List of David's wives and sons. 

2. •n^''l] The Kt., as We. suggests, might be pointed llp'l (for 
^''^!'.!1), on the analogy of the contracted forms which now and then 
occur in Pi el (Nah. i, 4 I'IK'Ii'l. Lam. 3, 33 na*1. 53 ^"1*1. 2 Ch. 32, 30. 
Qre '"lE^'l: GK. § 69"). However, the contraction is in all cases 
against analogy, and therefore probably nothing more than a clerical 
error ; nor, in Pu'al, is there any instance of it at all. No doubt, the 
Qre ni?"^»1 is here right. 

DyJTlN^] belonging to, the dat. of reference: cf. i Ki. 14, 13 {Lex. 
512^ 5 c). On Ahino'am, see on I 25, 43. 

3. ns^a] Ch. ^N>3n; LXX here AaXorta, Aq. Symm. Theod. A^ia; 
in I Ch. 3, I B Aa/Avii^X, A and Luc. AaXouta. Klo. al. regard 
AAAOYIA as a corruption of AAAOYIA=nn"l, and ^N^JT of ^N^l'^,— 
two alternative forms of the same name. It is impossible to say what 
the original form of the name was : but 3S7 in 3X73 is open to the 
suspicion of being a dittograph of 3N7 in 7J''2N7. 

••^DlJn] See on I 25, 2. 

niK'j] A petty Aramaean kingdom on the E. of Jordan, N. of 
Gilead; cf. on I 27, 8. 

5. nn nt^N] By analogy (see v. 3^) the name of 'Eglah's first 
husband would be expected : doubtless, therefore, in is due either 
to a lapsus calami or to some transcriptional corruption. 

6. 'V. 6^ is the continuation of v. 1. Vv. 2-5 have been inserted 
subsequently, and v. 6^ conceals the juncture ' (We.). 

'2, prnno nNn] ' was making or shewing himself strong in ' [noty^r] 
etc., i.e. was gaining power and importance in connexion with the 
house of Saul. The verb is not used elsewhere in a bad sense 
(cf. 2 Ch. 1,1. 12, 13 etc.), except sq. 7y {ib. 17, i); but in the light 
of V. 8 ff. it is probable that it is used here to suggest the idea of 
acquiring undue power, and presuming too much. 

7. B'J^D SxK'i'l] For the form of sentence, cf. 4, 4. 13, 3. 14, 6 
cn '•JCy ^n^E)K'^l. I 28, 24 etc. ; cf. on I i, 2. 

///. 7-72 » 247 

IDKM] As Ishbosheth has not been hitherto named in the present 
connexion, the insertion ^NK^'P (^ySB'N) D^l B'"'X is necessary : cf. 
LXX KOi eiTrev Me/x<^t/3oo-^€ (p. 240 n. 2) vios SaouX. 

8. rmn''^ ItJ'N] ' belonging to Judah.' The point lies in the refer- 
ence to \S\t Judaean 3^3 K'KI (cf. Ewald, iii. ii6«.). LXX, however, 
do not express the words ; and many moderns omit them, on the 
doubtful supposition that they are a gloss added by a scribe who 
vocalized 3?2, in order to explain that this was the name of the 
Judahite clan (see on I 25, 3). 

D1\n] with emphasis, to-day, at this time. Abner protests that at the 
very time at which Ishbosheth is bringing his charge against him, he 
is doing his best for the house of Saul. 

n^ys] I do, — the impf. expressing present habit. Klo. Bu. nb'yn, 
putting the segolta on QVn. 

^npn] h plural form : cf. on I 30, 26. 

nrT'VCn] So, sq. Tia, Zech. n, 6. X^ or n^ to arrive, come to, 
7\'^r\ to cause to come to, with "VZ place into the hand of, hand over to. 

npsni] = ajid (yet) thou visitest, etc. For the adversative sense, 
sometimes implied in "1, cf. 19, 28. Gen. 32, 31 : Tenses, § 74/3. 

n^i'Xn X\)f\ LXX nc^N ]'\'}1 ' a fault concerning a woman ' (and 
nothing more). So We. Klo. Bu. etc. 

9. ""3 ... '•3] The second O is resumptive of the first (I 14, 39). 

11. im "i:3X ns 3''trn^] nan 'a y^^n is properly to turn one back 
with (GK. § 117^^) a word; hence, in a weakened sense, reply to, 
answer : so I 17, 30 and often. If the lit. meaning were 'bring back 
word to,' we should, by all analogy, require b^ or h for riN (cf. the 
Arab, idiom, cited in Thes. 1374^). 

12. innn] Generally explained 2i?,=tvhere he was (2, 23). But 
the use is singular : for the suffix would refer naturally not to TiT but 
to the subject of ni'B'^l (see 2, 23 ; and on I 14, 9). Lucian has ci? 
Xefipoyv ( = p3n), of which innn is prob. a corruption; see below. 

pK'^oi? IDN^] At least pNrr^O^ would be required, if the words 
were meant to express Whose is the land? but even so, they are 
incompatible as they stand with what follows, ^nx innn nm3 "1CN7, 
which is also the purport of the message, and which according to 

248 The Second Book of Samuel, 

Hebrew usage ought to follow innn immediately. The least change 
that will suffice to produce an intelligible sentence, is to read pxn"'>JDi', 
and to omit the following IDN^. At the same time, it must be 
admitted that the proposal '31 ^HN "Jfl^ia nm3 is complete without 
any prefatory introduction; and probably noN^ )>-ix ^rh is merely 
a double dittograph of the preceding ~iDx!?. LXX Trpos Aavet8 €19 

®aL\afji ov ^v Trapa)(prjfjLa Xeywv AidOov ktX., where 7rapa;;(p-^)U,a^innn, 

SO that €ts ©atAa/A ov ^v (et? ©rjXajxov yrjv Cod. A) must be a subse- 
quent insertion, in the wroftg place, representing innn again (=ets 0at) 

and pN ^12^ "IDN^ [pN (l»i?)^»^ = Xafxov y-qv, hence Xafx ov r]v]. 

Uapaxprjfxa XeyMv AidOov appears to shew that in the Hebrew text 
used by LXX nm3 I'Onh innn stood together : if with Luc. pan be 
read for innn, this would yield an excellent sense (so Now.). Bu., 
sirnplifying a suggestion of Klo.'s, would read (after in) '•nnn idn!? 
':i nn-13 r\^-\^ ^»b nnb Y-\iin < saying, The land is under me (at my 
disposal) to give to whom I please : ' but the Heb. idiom for under 
a person's authority or control is not 'd nnn (except of a wife, Nu. 
5, 19 al.), but 'a T nnn (I 21, 4. 5. 9. Jud. 3, 30. Is. 3, 6: Lex. 
1065^; notice also 'S T nnna 2 Ki. 8, 20. 13, 5 al., id. 1066^). 
^Dy n''] Cf. Jer. 26, 24 (nN); rather differently, r/^. 14, 19. 

13. 2)D] i.e. (?oo^.^ (=/ agree): cf. I 20, 7. i Ki. 2, 18. Note 
the ''JK (see on I 26, 6). 

^^{^3^ "iJO? DN ''D] ' except before thy bringing ' — an unintelligible 
construction. DN >:d and iJD^ exclude one another; and we must 
read either ^Nian ''JS7 before thy bringing, or (cf. Gen. 32, 27) DN ""3 
nN^n ^jff<'/>/ thou bring. The latter is expressed by LXX {lav fii] 


14. See I 18, 27. 

15. tJ'"'N Dyro] 'from a man!' Read, of course, with LXX n^^N; 
For DyiD, cf. I 10, 9. 18, 13. 

^•h (Qre)] See I 25, 44. 

16. Dnn3] On the way between Jerusalem and Jericho (16, 5. 
17, 18), not improbably (Buhl, 175; EB. s, v.), at either Bukedan 
\\ miles, or Rds ez-Zambi 2^ miles, ENE. of Jerusalem, near the old 
Roman road, leading down to Jericho. Targ. no^y (^^?V ' Ch. 

///. 72-2/ 249 

6, 45 = f^'-'py Jos. 21, 1 8, now 'A/tnft 3^ miles NE. of Jerusalem), — 
no doubt from riD/J? having apparently a similar meaning to Dnn3 
(cf. %jiw//^/ and D^??by, Dnn2, bothj/<?«M/«/ a^^). 

17. iTn . . . -I21l] '//ad? been,' a plup. : for DJ? nm cf. Jud. 18, 7. 
I Ki. I, 7. 

U^b^ D3 h?:n DJ] Cf. Ex. 4, 10. r/^. 5, 2. 

Ct^pntD Dn''\n] '^at'f 3^^« (continuously) seeking.' Cf. Dt. 9, 7. 
22. 24: r^wj^j, § 135. 5 ; GK. § ii6r. 

18. T'^"\r\] 'Evidently a clerical error for y-t^lX, which many MSS. 
have, and which is expressed by all versions ' (Keil). 

19. aiD] ait2, after IK^N, will be the verb {Lex. 373^). 

20. D''C'JX D''it^y] Ehrlich would read '^ <^'t?V, (Jud. 20, 10). 
B'''N nnK^y is correct (GK. § 134®); but the type Ct^'liN nn:5>y is very 
rare and anomalous : 2 Ki. 2, 16 (perhaps due to the following pTl ""J^ : 
Herner, Syntax der Zahlw. 106). Jer. 38, 10 (Ew. al. ria'7K')f . 

n''t^JN?1] The men being definite (20^), □'•SJ'Jxb is certainly what 
would be expected : comp. i, 11. 17, 12. 
nntJ'O] For the position, see on 14, 12. 

21. nDpNI] Notice the pausal form with the small distinctive accent, 
pazer {Tenses, § 103 with n. 2). On 'jK'SJ niNn, see on I 2, 16. 

22. N3] No doubt, ' Joab is the principal person for the narrator' 
(Keil) : but, with 3NV1 in nny preceding, Nn by Hebrew idiom 
ought to be plural. Read CJ^S (i. e. in the older orthography DXa) : 
a D has dropped out before TiljnD. 1N3 "i'3D (see on I 12, 5). 

24. "ivn ■J7''l] ' and he is gone (with) a going' = 'and he is gone 
oj^,' — very idiomatic and forcible, not to be abandoned in favour of 
the more ordinary expression here offered by LXX ^Vl^ ^^l[ •'=If^!'.l 
'}) {iv elp-^vrj is manifestly derived merely from vv. 21^. 22^. 23^: 
but while the narrator, and reporters, use the common D)?^2 ']?''), 
Joab characteristically expresses himself with greater energy ']y) 
•]1?n). At the same time, v. 2^ would doubtless be more forcible 
as an interrogative ; and it is very probable that NvH has fallen out 
after '\hr\. 

25. N3 iniDD? '•3] The regular order in such constructions: cf. 
Gen. 42, 9. 47, 4. Jos. 2, 3. Jud. 15, 10. 12. I 16, 2. 5. 

^Ni3D] Why the abnormal (and incorrect) form ^?3^0 should be 

250 The Second Book of Samuel, 

substituted as Qre, unless for the sake of the assonance with "JNVID, 
is not apparent. 

26. nTDn 112] The 'cistern of Sirah.' There is an 'Atn Sarah, 
about a mile N. of Hebron, on the road to Jerusalem, which may be 
the place meant {JDB. and EB. s. v.). 

27. "lytiTi "Jin ?n] The middle of the gate would scarcely be the 
place in which Joab could converse with Abner quietly. LXX e/c 
vXayidDv t^s ttvAt}? = "W^ri T]T bn (see Lev. i, 11. Nu. 3, 29. 35 
Hebrew and LXX) ' to the side of the gate/ which is favoured also 
by the verb "int3''1 ' led aside.' 

v^j^l] A usage approximating curiously to the Aramaic : comp. 
^N,^-^ in quietude, quietly, in the Pesh. I 12, 11 al. (= n^2). Is. 8, 6 
(= t2Sp). Job 4, 13 (of the quiet of night). Ehrlich, however, for 
inD''l h^l conjectures '^^'^'^ "'K'''3N') ; cf. v. 30. 

tyonn DLJ' inD""!] Probably i^N should be restored before B^onn, in 
conformity with the construction elsewhere (2, 23. 4, 6. 20, 10). 

28. p nnND] 15, I. 2 Ch. 32, 23t. 

"'"'' Dyn] DyD, the acquittal being conceived as proceeding from 
Yahweh : comp. Nu. 32, 22 i'N"i2J'''l01 niiTD D^'^pJ Dn"'M1. 

29. li^iT'] Comp. Jer. 23, 19 = 30, 23 (of a tempest) D^yj^n B'Ni /y 
ijini; Hos. II, 6. 

^Nl] byi n^3D (see on I 12, 5); so 10 MSS. 
!» ma"' ^Ki] Cf. Jos. 9, 23. 

*I?D3 pTno] eUi is /o be globular or round (especially of a woman's 
breasts): hence eUi is the sphere in which a star moves (Qor. 21, 34. 
36, 40), and aJQi the whorl of a spindle, Lat. verticillus, as ^^3 in 
Hebrew, Prov. 31, 19 (see EB. iv. 5277 f.). Here "jba was formerly 
(LXX (TKVTakrf ; Rabb. ; EVV.) commonly supposed to denote a 
staff: but (a) other words are elsewhere used in Hebrew to express 
this idea (see 2 Ki. 4, 29. 31, and especially Zech. 8, 4 Wjy^D B'^SI 
D^0'» 'jyo n''^), ((^) there is no trace of such a meaning in the cognate 
languages (see Levy, Freytag, Lane), (c) the transference of the term 
to denote an object lacking the characteristic feature (the whorl) 
which it properly denotes, is improbable, and (d), even if it were so 
transferred, as the ' spindle ' was not more than some 1 2 inches long, 
it is not likely to have been applied to a walking-stick. Aq. Symm. 

///. 2<5-xr 251 

{arpaKTov), Jer. (/usum), Pesh. (Dj^oas) render spindle ; and philo- 
logy and usage agree in supporting this rendering : the word, meaning 
properly ' whorl,' will have come naturally to suggest the spindle as 
a whole. David's words are an imprecation that Joab may always 
count among his descendants — not brave warriors, but — men fit only 
for the occupations of women. Comp. how ' Hercules with the 
distaff' was the type of unmanly feebleness among the Greeks. 

30. ijnN^ inn] i? as I 23, 10 (see note), and with i-\r\ itself (in 
/afer Hebrew) Job 5, 2. The verse interrupts the narrative ; and the 
b may be due to its being in fact (We. Bu. Now. Sm.) a late gloss. 
Ew. Klo., on the ground of LXX SiaTraperijpowTo, prefer to read 
'2"]^ /aid ambush for : but this would scarcely be a just description 
of the manner in which Joab actually slew Abner: nor does the 
preceding narrative imply that Joab and Abishai had done previously 
anything that could be so described. 

31. nSD] wail ; see on I 28, 3. 

"133N ""JS?] i. e. preceding the bier in the funeral procession. 

33. niDDn] not ' Did Abner die ? ' (ritrH), but ' Was Abner on the 
way to die?' was this the end reserved for him? For the impf. cf. 
2 Ki. 3, 27 his firstborn ■J^D'' "IC'K who was to reign after him: 
13, 14 the illness 13 niD^ ntrx which he was to die of: Tenses, 
§ 39)8; GK. § 107k. t. For the dagesh in 3, see GK. § looi. 

34. ni"lDN~N?] N7 with the ptcp. is unusual, and to be imitated with 
caution: comp. Jer. 4, 22. \\;. 38, 15. Job 12, 3 (Ew. § 320^). 
Ez. 22, 24. Dt. 28, 61 : Tenses, § 162 «. ; Lex. 519*^ b c. 

n^riB'm] 2. pair of bronze fetters : Jud. 16, 2it (GK. § 88^). 

i?1D:D] sc. hti'\ir\\ comp. I 2, 13 (i'C^'aa). On hl1, see on I 25, 25. 

Abner, David laments, has experienced a death that was un- 
deserved: he has died the death of a hll, a reprobate, godless 
person, whom an untimely end might be expected to overtake. 
There was nothing to prevent Abner from defending himself, had he 
suspected Joab's treachery (34*); as it was (34^), he had succumbed 
to the treacherous blow of an assassin. 

35. nnan?] The verb is confined to this book (12, 17. 13, 5. 6. 
10): so T\''-\lfood 13, 5. 7. lof. ni"i3 occurs Lam. 4, 10; and n=li3 
\\i. 69, 22t. 

•252 The Second Book of Samuel, 

DN ""3] "CicA. ■= except, as v. 13: the two particles are to be separ- 
ated, '•3 introducing the oath, as I 14, 44, and DN' expressing it 
(«/".../ = stcrely not). HDIXD b'Z : Gen. 39, 23t. 

36, 'yi 73D] ' as whatsoever the king did pleased all the people ' 
(EVV. ) would require b'2 "IC'ND for ^33 (d never having the force of 
a conjunction). The text can only be rendered, ' Like all that the 
king did, it (viz. his conduct on the present occasion) pleased all the 
people' (niD being the verb, as v. 19). ^3 for 733 (LXX, Bu. Now.) 
yields a very abrupt sentence, not in accordance with Heb. style. 

37. i^dhd] So "h nn-'n mn'-tD i Ki. 2, 15: cf. Jud. 14, 4 '•"^d '•a 
NNT {Lex. 579^ d); and rixt?, as ^n^^ ni.T' DND Jos. 11, 2oal. 
(Z^jt:. 86b4b). 

39. "Il] tender, weak, opp. to D"'tJ'p. 

1^0 nit^?0"l] The contrast which, in virtue of the contrasted ideas 
connected by it, is implicit in the copula 1, would be expressed in 
English distinctly by and at the same time, and yet, or though (cf. 
Cant. I, 5). Ew. rendered, 'And I this day live delicately and am 
anointed as king,' etc. The sense thus attached to y\ is defensible 
(Dt. 28, 54 SJyni "ja inn. Is. 47, i) : but the rendering labours under 
the disadvantage of obliterating the antithesis, which, nevertheless, 
seems to be designed, between Ti and D''t^p. MT. (so far as the 
consonants go) is presupposed by LXX (cnj-yyev-^s = 1"1 misread as 
*T^, see Lev. 18, 14. 20, 20: koI Ka^to-ra/xeVos {itto ^acrtAecas = 

T]bo niB'r?=i). 

4, I. blNtJ'-p] 'LXX rightly inserts nC'3-C'''X before hsK' p: the 
omission in the Hebrew may perhaps be explained by the resemblance 
between (i^yntTN) n:i'n{y^N and j;0K'''1 ' (Dr. Weir). 

W ID'T'l] as Jer. 6, 24. Is. 13, 7 al., fig. for lost heart: the masc. 
as Zeph. 3, 16. 2 Ch. 15, 7 by GK. § 145P. 

1^n3)] a strong word, more than 'were troubled,' were alarmed, 
\j/. 48, 6. Jer. 51, 32 al. : elsewhere in early prose only I 28, 21. 
Gen. 45, 3. Jud. 20, 41. 

2. Dnnj] guerilla bands; cf. 2 Ki. 5, 2 ; also I 30, 8. i Ki. 1 1, 24 ; 
and Gen. 49, 19 'As for Gad, a troop may troop upon him; But he 
will troop upon their heel.' 

///. ij-— /F. 4 253 

Pisyp ITi] The text, as it stands, is not translateable. Read 
with LXX ^iNK>-p (^ynt^•N^) 7\^i-\i;^^ vn. 

miNS] i.e. Wells; mentioned as closely associated with Gibeon, Chephlrah, 
and Qiryath-ye'arim in Jos. 9, 17, as Canaanite towns which long maintained their 
independence in Israel, and with Qiryath-ye'arim and Chephlrah in Ezr. 2, 25 
( = Neh. 7, 29); and after Gibeon and Ramah, and before Mizpeh (Nebi Samvvil) 
and Chephlrah, in the list of Benjaminite cities in Jos. 18, 25 f.f. It is generally 
identified with el-Bireh, a village with several springs or ' wells,' 4 miles NNE. of 
Gibeon, and 9 miles N. of Jerusalem, on the great northern road: Buhl {Geogr. 
173), however, and Now., on the strength of Eusebius' statement {Ottom. 233, 83 f.) 
that it was 7 miles from Jerusalem on the road to Nicopolis {Amivds), — which, if 
this were the present Jaffa road, would be at a point about 3 miles S\V. of Gibeon, 
—prefer this site (which would also bring Be eroth nearer to the cities with which 
it is associated in Jos. 9, 17. Ezr. 2, 25). Robinson (i. 452), however, placing the 
' road to Nicopolis' more to the north, thinks el-Bireh compatible with Eusebius' 

bv ati'nn] Cf. Lev. 25, 31 3^0.'. r'^^r) mty hV; and with h, Jos. 
13, 3 nB'nri "'^yisb. 

3. Dna DE' V.T1] nna is the ptcp.: 'and Xhty continued (on I i8, 9) 
sojourning there,' viz. as D'''}.3, or protected foreigners (on i, 13), 
The Gibeonites, with no doubt the inhabitants of their dependent 
towns (Jos, 9, 17), Chephlrah, Be'eroth, and Qiryath-yearim, were 
not Israelite, but Amorite (ch. 21, 2); and the Beerothites had, for 
some reason, fled to Gittaim, — presumably the Gittaim mentioned 
Neh. 1 1, 3 3t in a list of Benjaminite cities, next after Ramah, — where 
they sought and obtained protection as gerim. 

4. 'ji ^<3a ^^^ d'^jc' C'on p] njc' t^'on p Nini (without n»n) would 
be excellent Hebrew ; but it is not supported by LXX, as Bu. claims : 
LXX connects WT^^ tron p with what precedes, and then for n\ni has 
Koi ovTos. With MT. cf. 2 Ki. 8, 17. 14, 2. 15, 2. 33. 

nrana] Ehrlich would point rntDn3=ntsnn3 (see p. 37 «.), remarking 
that the Qal (Dt. 20, 3. i/^. 31, 23. 116, 11. Job 40, 231) is used of 
hurry and alarm in general, but the Nif. (I 23, 26. 2 Ki. 7, 15 Kt. 
(//■. 104, 7t) of hurry and alarm m flight. 

T\^2>^-6] In I Ch. 8, 34 {bis). 9, 40* bv^ nna, in 9, 40b byn-no. 
One of these forms is certainly the original name. There was a time 
when the name 7^3 owner or master (of the place or district) ^ was 

1 See art. Baal in DB., EB., and (most fully) in Hastings' Encycl. of Rel. 
and Ethics, ii. 283 ff. Cf also above, p. 63 f. 

254 The Second Book of Samuel, 

applied innocently to Yahweh ^, as Owner of the soil of Canaan : but, 
in consequence no doubt of the confusion which arose on the part 
of the unspiritual Israelites between Yahweh and the Phoenician god 
' Baal/ the habit was discountenanced by the prophets, especially by 
Hosea (2, 18), and ultimately fell out of use. Proper names, therefore, 
in which hvi originally formed part had to be disguised, or otherwise 
rendered harmless. This was generally done by substituting ntJ'3 shame^ 
for 7y3, as in the case of Ishbaal (above, on 2, 8), and of Meribbaal 
the name of Saul's grandson here, and of one of his sons by Rizpah 
in 21, 8. In the case of the latter name the change to ntt^santO 
(or ntJ'3"'"i>D) appears not to have been thought sufficient ; and the 
name was further disguised by being altered to nB>3''S0, which was 
probably taken to mean 'One who scatters or disperses (cf. Dt. 32, 26 
DiT'NaN, — though this word is certainly corrupt) Shame '.' Jerubbaal 
(Gideon), ' the Master contends,' being interpreted to mean ' One 
that contends with Baal ' (Jud. 6, 32), was suffered to remain, except 
in ch. II, 21, where it was altered to ]ev\xhbesheth. In less read books, 
however, the names remained sometimes unchanged : thus ^yatJ'N and 
^y32''"H3 are preserved in Ch., as also "syhv^, ' the Master knoivs,' the 
name of a son of David, called in ch. 5, 16 yi^!?N ' God knows V and 
the name of David's hero 7\'hv'^ i Ch. 12, 5, and of his officer pni'ya 
27, 28 ^ It will be observed that these names are particularly frequent 

^ See DB. i. 210''; EB. i. 403 ; Encycl. of Rel. and Ethics , ii. 291 f. 

2 For 7W2, shame as a designation of Baal, see Jar. 3, 24. 11, 13. Hos. 9, 10; 
comp. in LXX i Ki. 18, 19. 25 ol npo(pTiTai t^s aiVxw?;?. Dillmann, in an 
elaborate essay devoted to the subject in the Monatsberichte der Kon.-Preuss. 
Academie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1881, June 16, observing the strong 
tendency shewn not only in LXX, but in other ancient versions as well, to obscure 
or remove the name of Baal, thinks that the habit of substituting alax^vr) for it is 
the explanation of the strange f) Baa\ of certain parts of LXX (e. g. Jeremiah • 
constantly, — 2, 23. 7, 9. 11, 13. 17. 19, sal. Hos. 2, 10. 13, i : so Rom. 11, 4): 
Baa\ was left in the text, but the fern, of the art. was an indication that alax^^ 
was intended to be read. No traces of an androgynous Baal have been found in 
Phoenician Inscriptions. 

' Lucian has throughout (except 21, 8) the intermediate form Mf/x^j^ooA. 
Perhaps this is a survival of the first stage in the transforming process. 

* Comp. Jud. 9, 46 n''-i2 ^N for nnn ^ya 8, 33. 9, 4. 

* Comp. also Py3 itself, as a pr. n., i Ch. 5, 5. 8, 30 ( = 9, 36). 

IV. 4-10 255 

in the families of Saul and David, both zealous worshippers of Yahweh 
(comp. among other things in the case of Saul the name of his son 
jnain''). Pyaano will be a name of the same form (a rare one in 
Hebrew : above on I i, 20) as the Nabataean i5ND''po (Cooke, NSI. 
78, 2), and ^N3T^trD, ^KaD^^D (above, p. 18 note). 

5. DIM onj] Gen. 18, i; I II, 9 Qref. 

Dnnvn aaa'O nx] The cogn. accus. aati'D is here not the place 
of reclining {=couc/i), but the act of reclining (as in the expression 
13T 2211^12 Jud. 21, II al., and c/i. 17, 28 [see note]), in the present 
context = jzi?j/a/ 'was taking his noon-tide rest.' 

6. tronn-^N inaM n''Dn '<npb nnn iiri'iy "ixa njni] nan th'tker is 
redundant : 1N3 and )ny\ both anticipate prematurely 7** ; Ctan Tipb is 
inappropriate, and the rendering 'as though fetching wheat' illegitimate. 
Read with We. after LXX Xf'l^^ Djni D'-tsn nbipb n^in nnyb' r\iy\\ 
' and behold the portress of the house was cleaning wheat from stones 
(LXX iK(i6aip€v: cf. Is. 57, 14 Ka6api(TaT€ for ^?b, read as ^-'f'P), and 
she slumbered and slept, and Rechab and Ba'anah slipt in,' etc. The 
words explain how it happened that Rechab and Ba'anah obtained 
entrance to Ishbosheth's house. 

ID7DJ] sh'pt in or through (LXX hiiXoBov, joining the word closely 
with V. 7 ' slipt through, and entered into the house,' etc.), in accordance 
with the primary meaning of the root (cf 13J0 Is. 34, 15 ; tOv'?'!' 66, 7^), 
and not in the special sense of slipping through or away from pursuers, 
i.e. of escaping. 

7. nniyn] See on 2, 29. 

8. P"i3n] to Hebron: see p. 37 n. 2. 

lyiTtti hxK'D . . . niDP3 . . . jn^i] So 22, 48 (=i/.. 18, 48) inun h^r\ 
h niDp3 : comp. T-a^lND niDpj nin'' -j^ r\m ItJ'X nnx Jud. 1 1, 36. For 
\r:)/rom (in Old Engl, of), cf. also Jer. 20, 10. 12; I 14, 24. 24, 13. • 

9. 'y\ ma nB'N*] So i Ki. i, 29. On ms, see the writer's note on 
Dt. 6, 8. 

10. ':"! rrri Xini] a circumst. clause. 

13 HTHKI] after "h T'JOn treated as a casus pendens ; so i Ki. 9, 20 f. 
12, 17. 15, 13: Tenses, § 127 a; GK. § iiih. 

1 Of laying eggs, properly (as it seems) elabi fecit (Ges.). Cf. the Nif. in I 20, 
29 ' let me get away ' (without the idea of escaping). 

256 The Second Book of Samuel, 

mK'a li5"''nn^ IK'n] 'to whom I ought, forsooth, to have given 
a reward for his good tidings ' (so Bu. Dh.). TiTO (' to whom it was 
for my giving') must be explained on the analogy of 2 Ki. 13, 19 
ntanp percutiendum erat quinquies aut sexies, — an extension of a 
usage more common in present time, Hos. 9, 13 etc. {Tenses, § 204). 
The clause can hardly express David's view of the transaction : he 
could not think that the Amaleqite really deserved a reward for his 
tidings: it must express what David ought to have done in the 
judgment of the Amaleqite himself, or of men in general unable to 
appreciate David's regard for Saul (hence 'forsooth'). Keil : '.that 
I might give him a reward for his good tidings ' (ironically), treating 
IB'N 2i'&=^ttamely (Ew. 338^) : so substantially RV. But such a sense 
of "iCi'N cannot be substantiated : so that, if this be felt to be the 
meaning of the passage, we must follow the suggestion of We. 
to ' omit "W^, as due to a false interpretation of 17 Tin?, which in 
its turn arose from a mistaking of the ironical sense of m:J'3.' So 
Now. Sm, ; cf. GK. § ii^^n. Ehrl. TinJ for Tinb : 'which I gave 
him as a reward for his good tidings ! ' This, remarkably enough, is 
the exact sense expressed by RV. (=AV. marg.), ' which was the 
reward I gave him for his tidings,' presumably without emendation I 

1 1. ^3 f)N] hovo much more (should I do so), wheji . . . ; as Ez. 15, 5. 
Job 9, 14; and ^3 c^Xl I 23, 3. 2 Ki. 5, 13. 

pnv CIS nx] n^< followed by an undefined subst. ; comp. on I 9, 3. 

DiT'O , , , tJ'piN] The same idiomatic use of T>a in I 20, 16. Gen. 
31. 39- 43. 9- Is. I, 12. Ez. 3, 18. 20 (im). 33, 8 (im); and with 
ti'-n Gen. 9, 5 (m). Ez. 34, 10. 

^nnyai] Cf. i Ki. 22, 47 pxn-|D nya; 2 Ki. 23, 24; nnx nj;? 
I Ki. 14, 10. 21, 21 ; and the frequent Deuteronomic phrase J?iy?^ 
(^N"IK'''») 131pO yin Dt. 13, 6. 17, 7. 12 al. Jud. 20, 13. 

12. IX^'p""!] The word is used similarly in Jud. i, 6. 7. 

5, 1-3. 6-10=1 Ch. II, 1-9. The parallel passages in Chronicles 
should be compared, and the variations noted, in the manner exhibited 
above, on I 31. The reader who will be at the pains of doing this 
consistently (especially in the parts of Chronicles which are parallel to 
1-2 Kings), will, when he has eliminated the variations which seem 
to be due to accident, understand better than from any description in 

IV. 10 — V. 2 257 

books the method followed by the Chronicler in the compilation of 
his work, and the manner in which he dealt with his sources in the 

5, I. "iDX? nDX''l] 'Thus, immediately together, rarely, 20, 18. 
Ex. 15, I. Nu. 20, 3 [add Jer. 29, 24. Ez. 12, 27 LXX, Cornill. 
33, 10. Zech. 2, 4 '] ; Ges. Thes., p. 119b ; on the contrary, very 
frequently as in v. 6. Jud. 15, 13, separated by a pronoun or other 
word ' (We.). Geiger in an article on this idiom ^ regards it as a 
mark of the later period of the language, and seeks to shew that 
most of the passages in which it occurs — even those of the second 
class noticed by We. — are redactional additions. But nox^ was in 
such frequent use for the purpose of introducing a speech, that its 
proper force must have been early forgotten ; and the habit must 
soon have grown up of using it instinctively, irrespectively of the 
fact that the same verb might have been already employed in the 

1Jm^< , . , iJjn] ' Behold us ! we are,' &c. i Ch. 11, i has r\:ir\ alone. 

i:mx "in^i'ni IDVy] So in the ||, i Ch. 11, i; and similarly ch. 
19, 13 onx n:^ni "'Dvy. 14. Gen. 29, 14. Jud. 9, 2. 

2. nriN] Notice (thrice) the emph. pronoun. 

N''V1D nn''\-l] nDHI (with the art^ following shews that the words 
are wrongly divided, and that the Massorah is right in correcting 

■•nroni] K dropped as i Ki. 21, 21 T'^s' ■'30 '•Jjn. Jer. 19, 15. 39, 16 : 
I Ki. 21, 29. Mic. I, 15 (both ''3N) : i Ki. 12, 12 Dy^T U''1 al., 
sometimes (but not always) before another N (as though the omission 
were due to the juxtaposition of the two identical letters) : see 01. 
p. 69; GK.§74k. 

nns*] Note the emphatic pron. (twice). 

nyin] Here first in the metaph. sense. So 7, 7. Mic. 5, 3 ; and, 
with the figure usually developed explicitl)^, often in Jeremiah, as 2, 8. 
3, 15. 10, 21. 22, 22. 23, 1-4; Ez. 34 (throughout), al. 

TJi^] See on I 9, 16. 

1 Cf. Cornill, ZATIV. 1891, p. 22. 

^ Jiidische Zeitschrift, iv. i866, pp. 27-35 ; comp. v. p. 188 ; vi. p. 159. 
R.j; S 

258 The Second Book of Samuel, 

3. Urh ma""!] On the force of 7, see on I 18, 3. For the position 
of nn3, see on ch. 14, 12. 

4. D''y3"is] Read, with 14 MSS., and Versions, and parallel passages 
(as I Ki. 14, 21), O'lymsi. 

6. pxn acj'l''] i.e. the native inhabitants of the land: Gen. 34, 30. 
Ex. 34, 12. Jud. II, 21 al. 

IDN"'!] 3C. noiNn, — of course, among the Jebusites, LXX ippiOrj, 
either a paraphrase, or, if lit., presupposing "1P^??.1, which, standing 
alone, is not idiomatic (only Jos. 2, 2, sq. in'""!'' "J/O?). In Chr. 
(I 1 1, 4b. 5) the whole sentence is altered (: Y"^^^ '^^' '^''^'^ ^f] 
l>)lb D13> ''3B''' 11DN''1 for inb '\t2ii'') pSH 2m'< ''D^n bn). 

'31 ?|Tpn DK ^3] 'but (on I 8, 19 : Lex. 475*) the blind and the 
lame will turn thee aside,' substantially as RV. m. : the sing, by Ew. 
§ 316a; GK. § 1450; and the pf. by GK. § 106"^, though the impf. 
would be better (We. al.). But it is better to read ^■J''D^ Their 
fortress, they mean to say, is so strong that even the blind and the 
lame in it are sufficient to keep David from entering it. ' Except thou 
take away ' (AV. RV.) would require (ITpi]? or) nn^DH DN ^3. The 
Chronicler (I 1 1, 5) omits everything from DN ""J to the end of 
the verse. 

D^iiynj GK. § 35^. On the forms l.V, nE3, see GK. § 84 ^d. 

7. On the site of the old Jebusite stronghold, Zion = the ' City of 
David,' see Stade, Gesch. Isr., i. 315 f.; DB. Zion ; EB. ii. 2417- 
20; most fully G. A. '^vcix'Ca, Jerusalem (1908), i. 154-169. The part 
of Jerusalem which is now called Zion, and is so marked on many 
maps, is the South- West Hill ; but the tradition identifying this hill 
with the Biblical Zion does not reach back beyond the 4th century a. d.; 
and there are the strongest reasons, based on the usage of the OT. 
itself, for believing that the ' Zion ' of ancient times was the South- 
East Hill of Jerusalem, on the North, and highest, part of which 
stood the Temple, and on the South (contiguous to the Temple) the 
Royal Palace, built by Solomon. The author of i Mace, expressly 
identifies ' Zion ' with the hill on which the Temple was situate 
(i Mace. 4, 37 f. 7, 33). The site of the old stronghold, Zion, was 
entirely outside the modern city, on a narrow elongated hill, stretching 
out to the south of the present Haram esh-Sherif: see the Map facing 

V. ^-8 259 

EB. 2419-20 ('Opher), or, still better, the Maps in G. A. Smith, 
op. cit. ii., facing pp. 39, 51. 

8. 'V\ n3» ^3] The passage is very difficult, and the text certainly 
to some extent corrupt. Ti:s in the Mishnah means 2, pipe, spout, or 
water-channel ; and in \\f. 42, 8t it denotes the channels (cf. H^yri 
Job 38, 25), by which the Hebrews conceived rain to pour down 
from heaven. 

In other respects the renderings that have been generally adopted, both implying, 
however, a deviation from the existing MT., besides being highly questionable 
philologically, are {a) ' Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites, let him (the ) by Tenses, 
§ 125 ; GK. § 143'^) get up to the watercourse, and (smite) the blind and the lame,' 
etc. (so RV.). Upon this interpretation, nDD is supposed to have fallen out in 
clause d (HN ilSni for DXI). 'a y33, however, elsewhere means simply (0 touch : 
where it may be represented by the English word reach it is applied not to a person 
arriving at a spot, but to some object extending to it, so as to touch it, as i Ki. 6, 27 
the wing of the one cherub touched the wall, Hos. 4, 2 and blood toucheth, reacheth 
to blood (forming a continuous stream) : more often with *iy, 7K, or ?y, meta- 
phorically of misfortune, the sword, etc., Jud. 20, 34. 41. Mic. r, 9. Jer. 4, 10 al. 
Touch, the legitimate rendering of '1 VJJ, is weak: get up to is an unjustifiable 
paraphrase, {b) The words are rendered, with yj^l for yj^l, ' Whosoever smiteth 
the Jebusites, let him hurl down the water-channel both the blind and the 
lame,' etc. (so Ew. Ke.). But '3 yan means merely io make to touch = to Join 
(Is. 5, 8) : even with '7, ?N, or ly, it is only used of a building (or collection of 
buildings) made to touch the ground (viz. by being levelled to it), Is. 25, 12. 26, 5. 
Ez. 13, 14. Lam. 2, 2 (comp. py y^jn to make to touch (and rest) upon = to apply 
to, Is. 6, 7. Jer. i, 9 ; with 7N Ex. 12, 22 : with 'h Ex. 4, 2!^=to cast to the foot) ; 
or (intransitively) simply to reach, arrive at (I 14, 9al.). Thus though ^K yj^l 
TlJifn (or *iy) might mean ' level to the water-channel ' (so as to rest upon it), there 
is no analogy for interpreting "TlJifn ys^ to mean ' hurl down the water-channel.' 

Both these renderings of yj^ must therefore be abandoned. Of 
nuv, recent excavation in Jerusalem has given an attractive and, as it 
seems, probable explanation. From the 'Virgin's Spring' ('Ain 
Sitti [i. e. Sidti, My Lady] Mariam, also called 'Ain Umm el-Derdj, 
from the steps leading down to it), the ancient Gihon (i Ki. i, 33. 
38. 45. 2 Ch. 30, 30. 33, i4t), the one natural spring which 
Jerusalem possesses, on the E. of Ophel, and just opposite to the 
village of Siloam {Silwdti), there are carried through the rock two 
tunnels, one (1757 ft. long) leading down to the Pool of Siloam (see 
the Introd. §1), the other running W. of the Spring for 50 ft., where 

s 2 

26o The Second Book of Samuel, 

the rock is cut out so as to form a pool : above this there is a 
perpendicular shaft, 6 ft. by 4 ft., — called, from Sir C. Warren, who 
discovered it in 1867, 'Warren's shaft,' — which runs straight up 
through the rock for 44 ft., then there follows for 45 ft. a sloping 
ascent, rising at an angle of 45°, the tunnel then becomes horizontal 
for 40 ft., till finally after another ascent of 50 ft. it ends at the top 
of the hill, on which the original fortress of Zion must have been 
situated. At the top of the ' shaft ' there is an iron ring, through which 
a rope might have been passed for hauling up water from the pool 
below. The purpose of this tunnel is clear : it was to enable the 
garrison to draw upon the Spring from within the fortress, especially 
in the event of a siege (G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, i. 92 f . ; more fully 
Warren in the Survey of West Pal., Jerusalem volume, p. 367 f. with 
section of tunnel facing p. 368). Could this tunnel have been the 
11JV .'' It was certainly a ' water-channel ' from the spring to the pool 
at the bottom of the shaft ; and it is possible, at least with the help 
of a rough wooden scaffolding, to get up the perpendicular shaft, as 
Warren did, and so to pass on to the mouth of the tunnel at the top. 
Did some adventurous Israelites make their way up thus into the 
fortress of Zion, and surprise the garrison ? Pere Vincent thinks so 
{Underground Jerusalem, 191 1, p. 34); and it seems very probable. 
As however has been shewn, no sense suitable to y\Ti can be extracted 
out of yj''l; and we must, if we accept this view, wTite bravely 
?y:i. (cf. I Ch. II, 6 ^NV . . . bvlX) 'let him go up in {or by) the water- 
channel : ' this is at least both more scholarly, and more honest, than, 
with AV. RV,, to force upon yj'' the impossible meaning ' get up.' 

The following words, 'y\ DTlDSn DNI, as they do not make a 
sentence, must in some way be emended : and we may either, with 
AV., read nan] 'and smite the lame and the blind who are hated 
(Qre) of David's soul ' (on account viz. of what is said of them in v. 6), 
or (though the connexion is then poor) read "^^'^^ for ISJ'^, i. e. 
' and (= for) the lame and the blind David's soul hateth.' The last 
words of the v. can only mean (RV. ?;/.) ' The blind and the lame 
(i. e. mendicants) shall not [or do not] come into the house,' i. e. into 
the Temple (so LXX): the origin of a common saying (cf. Gen. 
22, 14; I 19, 24) about mendicants being excluded from the Temple 

V. 8-g 261 

is thus explained. But tl:ie saying is unrelated to v. 6 in its natural 
and obvious sense ; and in fact v. 8^ seems to be an old gloss, added 
by one who supposed t^ to mean 'Except thou remove the blind 
and the lame (in the Israelite army) who say, David will not enter in 
here : ' comp. the Targ., which paraphrases : ' Thou wilt not enter in 
here except thou remove the sinners and the guilty, who say, David 
will not enter in here ; ' and in 8, ' And the sinners and the guilty 
David's soul abhorreth : therefore they say, The sinners and the guilty 
enter not into the house.' 

Dhorme takes the same view of "lIJi*, though he restores the text differently : 
'And David said in that day, Whoso smiteth the Jebusites, and reacheth . . . 
[And the son of Zerniah went up (cf. 1 Ch. 11, 6^)1 by the water-channel . . . 
(Gloss on V.6: As for [GK. § 117'] the lame and the blind, they are hated of 
David's soul : therefore they say, The blind and the lame shall not enter into the 

Budde, regarding the words in v. 8 as spoken after the capture of Zion, and 
observing that we have a right to expect some thought worthy of a king (which 
hatred of enemies is not), and that David actually (24, 18) spared some of the 
Jebusites, conjectures : ' Whoso smiteth a Jebusite, toucheth kis own tieck (i. e. 
brings his own life into danger) ; the lame and the blind David's soul hateth noi ' 
(ns* i~l(N)-'1^3 for nSI "nJXn ; and HNJC' N^ for IWK') : cf. G. A. Smith, /erzt- 
satem, ii. 32. The conjecture is clever: it gives O W3 its proper sense ; and it 
attributes to David a fine and chivalrous thought ; but it is too bold to command 

The Chronicler (I 11, 6) for the whole of v. 8 has HSD ^3 1^)1 inS"''! 

Whether, however, this interpretation is correct, and words such as ^iCO nTIi 
IC^^I have fallen out in Sam., is very doubtful. 1130 ?3 is ' every one who smites ' 
(cf. 2, 23. Nu. 21, 8. Jud. 19, 30. I 2, 13. 36. 10, 11), not, as would be needed 
if such a reward as "IK'S C'XI^ ^^■l^ were promised, ' any otu who smites : ' Gen. 
4, 16 hardly proves the contrary; and where, in such sentences, an individual is 
in view, the wording is different (as Jud. i, 12 . , , 1DD"n"'"lp DX 113^ "ID'S. 

II, 3r. 1 17, 25 li'jon \r\^'T 133"' nt^s :j'^xn nvii. Nu. 16, 6. 17, 20). 

9. in P''l] I Ch. II, 8 n'^yn \y\ which is supported by LXX here 
{koX wKoho/jLTjaev avrrjv ttoXlv = "I""!? '^l^)\, Bu., — the words being differ- 
endy divided), and may be the original reading. 

N"ii?Dn] So in the ||, i Ch. 11, 8. i Ki. 9, 15. 24. 11, 27. 2 Ch. 
32, 5t : Nl^D n''3 near Shechem, Jud. 9, 6. 20 ; and also 2 Ki. 12, 2 if. 
Targ. for t/iis Millo has always NTT'^O, the word which also represents 

262 The Second Book of Samuel^ 

^^^, the motmd of earth cast up by the besiegers of a town. The 
word NvD means apparently Filling ; and probably denotes a mound 
or rampart of earth. Cf. G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, ii. 40 f. 
nn''3l] '1^!? housewards =■ inwards, as Ex. 28, 26 al. 

10. bm)] for the construction, see on I 14, 19. 

11. 'Piri] the form being for 'p^n-. GK. § 846^. 
11-25=1 Ch. 14, 1-16. 

13. ni't^'IT'O] I Ch. 14, 3 ub:i>y\''2, the more probable reading. 

14. n^i?)n] 1\b) 12, 14. Ex. I, 22. Jos. 5, 5. Jer. 16, 3t. The 
punctuation in all these cases is irregular: by analogy the plcp. 
n^p>n, DnTH is what would be required by the syntax. On the form, 
cf. Ew. § iss-i; Scade, § 224; Kon. ii. 148 f. ; GK. § 8436. 24: the 
parallels have all a substantival force (">i3?, lis?', "1^33, etc.). It is 
not clear with what right Hitzig (on Jer. /. c.) says that ' in virtue of 
passages such as 2 S. 12, 14 the punctuation "1^?^ is correct;' and 
the explanation adopted (apparently) by Dillmann on Jos. /. c. that the 
form is meant to express ' in contradistinction to C"!?? the idea of 
succession ' (' soil das " fort und fort, nach und nach " ausdriicken ') 
is incompatible with c/i. 12, 14 (of a single child). In i Ki. 3, 26. 27, 
and even in the parallel i Ch. 14, 4, in each of which passages (notice 
in Ch. the following r? vn "i{J>n) the substantival form would have 
been in place, the word is pointed as a ptcp. ("'v*l', CI^'^l'). The 
explanation in GK. /, c. is artificial. 

14^-16. The list of David's sons, born in Jerusalem, is repeated, 
I Ch. 3, 5-8, and also 14, 4-7, with the following variations: — 
2 Sam. 5. I C/i. 3. I C/i. 14. 

2-5 (2215^^, \n:, n»i?K>, nni'') without variation. 

7. vibsi^ba D^Ja^N 

8. ' nJJ 6 njj 
9-1 1. (333, yaS yOB'^^K) without variation. 

12. 1* jjT'ijx ^ )}i'hii ' jJT^ya 

13. ti^s^^N D!j2''i5X t^b^^ba 

yiDtJ' is perhaps an abbreviated, 'caritative' form, for iTiyDB* 
(Lidzbarskl, EphemeriSy ii. 21 ; Pratorius, ZDMG. Ivii. (1903), p. 774). 

V. g-20 263 

Cf. above, p. 19. In No. 12 yT^l^ya is evidently the true name, 
changed for the sake of avoiding bv^ to yT'i'S (comp. on 4, 4). LXX 
in I Ch. 14, 7 read with MT. yi^^yn (Svvete, i.e. Codd. B and Sin., 
BaAcySae; Cod. A BaAAiaSa ; Lucian BaaAtaSa; other MS S. BaAta8a). 
In the existing LXX text of 2 Sam. there are /wo renderings of the 
list ; and in the second, which appears to be derived from Ch,, the 
form with ^yn is likewise expressed [BaaXetfjiaO : so Luc. BaaAtXa^). 

5, 17. David and the Philistmes. 

17- l^yi] from the low-lying Philistine plain; cf. on I 29, 9. 

miit:n ^N TT1] The verb m^ shews that the miVO referred to 
cannot be identified with the mi^D of Zion, v. 9 : for that lay on an 
elevation, and the phrase used in connexion with it is always n?y. 
This mi^'D is no doubt the one in the wilderness of Judah, which 
David held (I 22, 4), — probably, in fact (see on I 22, i) the 'hold' of 
'Adullam (cf. II 23, 14, comparing 13). The natural position of 
5, 17-6, I is immediately after the account of David's being anointed 
king at Hebron (z'. 3) ; and here, or before v. 6, it no doubt originally 
stood (Kennedy, pp. 215, 218). David would of course both 'go 
down' from Hebron to 'Adullam, and also (v. 19) 'go up' from 
'Adullam to the Vale of Rephaim, close to Jerusalem on the SW. 

18. 1N*a DTitr^Eil] 'Now the Philistines had come' (cf. on I 9, 15). 
1CJ'D:''1] were let go, spread abroad, as Jud. 15, 9. Cf. CK'LJJ I 30, 16. 
CNSn poy] Probably the broad upland plain, el-Baqa, rich in 

cornfields and olive-gardens (Is. 17, 5 f.), with low hills on each side, 
which extended from a hill at the west end of the valley of Hinnom 
(|os. 15, 8) for some 3 miles SW. of Jerusalem. 

19. n^yxn] from the miVD of Z'. 17. 

20. D''\-iQ byn] Perhaps originally (Paton, Encycl. of Rel. and 
Ethics, ii. 286a) 'Ba'al of the breakings forth,' the name of a fountain 
bursting forth out of the hill-side, so called from the local 'Ba'al,' who 
was supposed to inhabit it (see on the local Ba'als supposed to inhabit 
trees, mountains, springs, etc., DB. or EB. s.v., and esp. Paton's 
learned art. just referred to ; cf. also above, p. 63 f. ; many names of 
places embody this belief, as Baal-Hermon, Baal-Meon, Baal-Tamar, 
etc.). As the name of the place is explained here, however, Ba'al 

264 The Second Book of Samuel^ 

does not denote the Canaanite or Phoenician god of that name, but is 
a title of Yahweh (cf. on 4, 4) ; and D''V"iD i'V2, in the sense of ' Master 
of breakings forth ' (upon the foe), is understood as commemorating 
the victory (comp. ''DJ nin"" Ex. 17, 15; m^tJ' mn'' Jud. 6, 24). The 
explanation, ' Place of breaches ' (Keil ; RV. marg.), is not probable : 
not only are the analogies quoted against it, but hv"^ in the sense of 
owner, possessor, though often used of human beings {e.g. 'IV!?' ^'^'^ 
2 Ki. 1,8) is very rarely applied to inanimate objects (Is. 41, 15 : 
Lex. 127I3). 

''ai f"l2] ' hath broken down my enemies before me, like the breaking 
of waters' through a dam. Cf. of breaking down a wall, i/^. 80, 13 
nnij n^iD no?; and '1 ps ('make a breach z«'), Ex. 19, 22. 24; 
'1 p2 pQ ch. 6, 8. 

21. DiT2^y] LXX rot's 6f.ov<i avTwv, and Ch. (I 14, 12) Dn\17N, — 
doubtless the original reading. 

VB'JNI in DKK'''l] See ^B. ii. 1918 an illustration of an Ass. 
warrior bearing in his hand a captured idol. The Chronicler, in 
order to leave no doubt as to what David did with the idols, sub- 
stitutes K'Na ID-IK'M T'H "I0N''1. 

23. it>vr\ iO'\ Add DDNipt' LXX, which is required by the sequel. 
3pn] The Hi/, is anomalous. Either n has arisen by dittography 

from npyn, and the Qal 3b (cf. LXX a-n-oa-Tpicjiov) should be restored ; 
or (Bu.) the word is used in a military sense, Lead round (thy men) : 
cf. the seemingly intrans. D''b' and JT'K' (on I 15, 2)^ and "jti'tD Jud. 4, 6. 
20, 37, and perhaps 5, 14. 

Dnnns ^x] So 2 Ki. 9, 18. 19. Cf. rr-^D ^n 2 Ki. n, 15 : pno ^jn 
Dt. 23, II al. ; nnn ^X i Ki. 8, 6. Zech. 3, 10. 

'V\ nNni] and come to them off the front of i^w our idiom : in front 

of) . . .: cf. Nu. 22, 5 '•bsp ac'i' Nim. 

n\SD3] Read, with LXX and i Ch. 14, 14 Ci"'X3nn. 

24. Till] and let //be ... : a permissive command : Tenses, § 121 
Obs. ; and I 10, 5 note. 

myv hp nx] ' the sound of a stepping.' i^ip may be sufficiently 
defined by the gen. myv (cf. Lev. 7, 8): but i Ch. 14, 15 has rni?i"n 
(cf. GK. § 1 17*1). 

pnn TN] 'look sharp is our colloquial equivalent' (Sm.). In 

V. 20 — VI. 2 265 

Ch. paraphrased, with much loss of originality and vigour, by J^^'n TN 

Ni'J] will have gone forth (GK. § 106°). 

'1 man?] The 3 is partitive, 'to make a smiting in' {Lex. 88^). 

25. V^yCi] LXX cLTTo Ta^aaiv, Ch. pynJO. This is better than yaj (on I 13, 2), 
which, being 5 miles NN^. of Jerusalem, is in the wrong direction altogether ; but 
Gibeon {el-Jib, 5 miles NN^F. of Jerusalem : on 2, 12) is not much better : as Sm. 
remarks, ' Both Geba' and Gibeon are too far from the Vale of Rephaim for the 
pursuit to begin at either one.' To judge from the large maps, also, there is no 
natural route down from el-Jib to Gezer. If, however, Geba' were the name 
of a place, not otherwise mentioned, near Jerusalem, on the road to Qaryet el-'Enab 
(Qiryath-ye'arim), the site would suit excellently ; for this road leads straight down 
to Gezer. The allusion in the second clause of Is. 28, 21* (Dip'' D''if"lD IHD "ij 
UT PV3:3 pcya mn'') may be not to this event, but to Jos. 10. 

~1TJ] Now Tell Jezer, 19 miles WNW. of Jerusalem, and 12 miles 
below Qaryet el-'Enab. The site, as is now well known, has been 
recently most successfully excavated : see, for some account of the 
principal results, the writer's ' Schweich Lectures ' on Modern Research 
as illustrating the Bible (1909), pp. 46-80, 88-98. 

6. Removal of the Ark to the ' City 0/ David.' 

6, I. fjOM] for fiDN^I, as ^Dh ,/^. 104, 29 (GK. § 68^) : cf. on I 15, 5. 
Whether this verse (with the omission of l-.y, which may have been 
added by a scribe, who inadvertently supposed fjD^I to come from pjD'') 
is really the introduction to v. 2 flf., is uncertain. It may form the 
sequel to 5, i 7-24 (in its original position : see on 5, 17), and perhaps 
at the same time (without nij?) the introduction to 5, 6-10. See 
Kennedy, p. 218. 

2-i2a=i Ch. 13, 5-14; between 12^ and i2t> the Chronicler 
inserts 14, i — 15, 24; 12^-14 is expanded and varied in i Ch. 15, 
25-27; 15-19^=1 Ch, 15, 28 — 16, 3 (with variations); i Ch. 16, 
4-42 is another insertion; 19^-20^=1 Ch. 16, 43 (vv. 20^-23 being 
omitted in Ch.). The variations between the two narratives are here 
remarkably striking and instructive. In particular the earlier narrative 
makes no mention of the Levites ; the later authority is careful to 
supply the omission. 

2. min-' hvyo] In i Ch. 13, 6 m\r\h tcs ony^ nnp h^ nnbp: 
and this is the sense which is required: Qiryath Ye'arim is called 

266 77?^ Second Book of Samuel, 

nbp Jos. 15, 9. 10, and !?yn-nnp ib. 60. 18, 14 (and 15 LXX): 
doubtless, therefore, VTWrV h'H'2 to Baal of Judah must here be re- 
stored, the description ' of Judah ' being added to distinguish this 
Ba'al from other places of the same name (in Simeon, Jos. 19, 8, 
in Dan, ib. 44 : of mint Dn^TT-a). miH^ ^y3 seems first to have 
been miswritten niin'' vW; and then, this being interpreted as= 
' citizens of Judah,' the partitive 'P was prefixed, in order to produce 
some sort of connexion with the preceding clause. The place must 
have been originally sacred to Ba'al. On its site, see on I 6, 21. 

Ivy . . , "iK'N] ' over which is called a name, (even) the name of 
etc. The phrase used betokens ownership: see on 12, 28. Omit 
one DC' with LXX. The distance of vi^y from "itJ^x suggests that 
the clause is glossed: read probably r^y '^ '■• Dti> Kip: "IK'N. In 
I Ch. 13, 6 DB' N"ipJ "IK'S is misplaced strangely to the end of the verse. 

3l'-4. The words v. 3 end-j^^ nt'N n*iJ''3S n^ao inSK^''1 \rw^n 
T\'^11'2. (which are not expressed in LXX) have been accidentally 
repeated from v. 3^: hence the questionable nj^in (p. 125 note') with 
n^jyn nx. Probably D\n^Nn jns oy was preceded originally by 
l?in XTyi : as thus corrected the verse will explain how 'Uzzah and 
Ahio '' led ' the cart : Uzzah going beside the ark, and his brother 
before it. The pr. n. Vnx (==in;nK : cf 'i''f '''<), in both 3* and 4, seems 
more probable than VriK (We.), or vns (LXX, with D''3^n in v. 4). 
So Sm. Bu. Now. 

5- Cpnc^o] were playing or making merry. See. on I 18, 7. 

DiE>»n3 ivy ?D3] The true reading of these words has been pre- 
served in I Ch. 13, 8, viz. Dn"'B'ai TjJ'^aa. So LXX here, Iv opya.voi<i 
■fipfjioo-fjievoL^ (see V. 14) and iv Io-xvl being a double rendering of 
^V (\?3) 733, and kol iv aJSats evidently representing D"'"l''Ci'31. 

D'-^v^vni D''yjy3ttai] Ch. nnvvnni 0^:1^5^031; LXX here nal iv 

KVfxfSdXoi^ Kal iv avXoLs = Q^b''bn2) D''n^VD31. MT. is doubtless original. 
For D'lyjyJO Aq. Symm. have appropriately o-cio-rpa (hence Vg. sistra) 
from o-eiw : see Lex. 63it>; UB. iii. 3227-8 (illustr.). Dv5f?V recurs 
•A- ^5°> 5+ • elsewhere (but only in Chr. Ezr. Neh.) always DTiPVD. 

6. |133 pj] ' "A fixed threshing-floor " does not satisfy the re- 
quirements of the sense : " t/ie fixed threshing-floor " is not expressed 
in the Hebrew — to say nothing of the questionable use of the epithet 

VI. 2-y 267 

pjj ; hence f13J, as LXX and the Chronicler have rightly seen, must 
conceal a pr. name ' (We.), or, at least some designation which, 
attached to pj, would constitute a pr. name (cf. Gen. 50, 16. 17 
^DNl^ p3 ; and I 19, 22). What this name or designation was must, 
however, remain uncertain. LXX here have Nw8a^, Ch. p'<2. 

nPK'M] Versions and i Ch. 13, 9 add rightly ITiTiX. The ellipse is 
not according to usage. 

IDOK^] Of uncertain meaning. DOK' is /o let fall, 2 Ki. 9, 33 (of 
Jezebel, nitan::"'"! nit:o:r). \\f. 141, 6; fig. to remit, hence r\\L)y$r\ n?6i' 
the year of the remittance (or rather inter viittcnce) of claims for debt, 
Dt. 15, I. 2 : in Aram, to pull away or loosen, Lev. 14, 40. 43 Pesh. 
and Ps.-Jon. ( = Heb. }*^n); to pull out or draw a sword, in Syr. also 
often in other connexions for iKairav; in Ethpa'el to he pulled out 
Ezr. 6, II ( = Aram. nD^JT"); in Ethpe'al avelli (PS.), as Dt. 19, 5 
Pesh. ( = Heb. ^B^j). Let \X fall (so Th.) is the rendering best sup- 
ported by Hebrew usage : but many have given the word an intran- 
sitive sense, — either, after Pesh. ()»or \ooC^ a^vfcl*./ , i.e. [see 
PS. 4207] se a iugo extraxerunt : in i Ch. 13, 9 yOo»^i. ooo» ci^ai), 
rail away (Maurer, Roed. in Thes.), or (by conjecture) slipped (Keil, 
Klo. : RV. stumbled) ; these renderings are, however, philologically 
questionable. LXX on Trepteo-Tracrev avr-qv (*^'?^) 6 fxocrxps (in I Ch. 
1 3 c^ckAivcv avTT^v) ; Targ. both here and i Ch. \11J1D (? threw it 
down: ? \Tn3rD as 2 Ki. 9, 33); Vulg. calcitrabant'^ (probably based on 
Aq. or Symm., whose renderings here have not been preserved) : 
in I Ch. bos quippe lasciviens paullulum inclinaverat earn. 

7. ?K'n 7y] n^B' is a very rare root in Hebrew : in Aramaic it has 
the sense of to act in error or neglect Job 19, 4 Targ.=Heb. T\W 
(cf. the Ntf in 2 Ch. 29, 11); in Af'el, to cause to act in error, mislead 
Job 12, 16 '»i?B^ = Heb. nj^p (cf. 2 Ki. 4, 28 Heb. do not mislead me): 
the subst. 1?^ means error, neglect Ezr. 4, 22. 6, 9. Dan. 3, 29. 6, 5 : 
in the Targ. = n3^IO or njj^ Gen. 43, 12; Lev. 4, 2. 5, 18. Nu. 15, 
24. 25 al. ^B'n here is commonly (since Targ. '"briB'NI 7V) explained 
from this root ' because of the error :' but (i) n?C is scarcely a pure 

' The Clementine text adds ' et declinaverunt earn ; ' but this is not found in the 
best MSS. of the Vulgate. 

268 The Second Book of Samuel, 

Hebrew word : where it occurs, it is either dialectical (2 Ki. 4) or late 
(2 Ch.) ; so that its appearance in early Hebrew is unexpected ; (2) 
the unusual apocopated form (^CJ' for h^) excites suspicion ^ Ewald 
explained Vcrr^'^ in the sense of the Sj-riac JJi^X ^^ suddenly (e.g. 
Nu. 6, 9. 8, 19 Pesh.); but this is open in even a greater degree 
to the same objection as the explanation error ; and though ^y is 
used in Hebrew in the expression of certain adverbial ideas (as "ip::> i?y, 
\\r\ ?y: on I 23, 23), the word associated with it is expressed 
generally, and is not provided with the article. Ch, has "IK'N ^y 
piNn 7y n"" xh^ ; and when the strangeness of the Hebrew expression 
here used is considered, it will hardly be deemed too venturesome 
to regard it as a mutilated fragment of the words cited from Ch., 
which were either still read here in their integrity by the Chronicler, 
or (as the sense is sufficiently plain without them) were introduced 
here as a gloss from the parallel text of Ch., and afterwards became 

D\n^Nri fllN Dy] ny as Jud. 19, netc. LXX add evwTrtov rov 
61607}= DNn^N >JD^ which in i Ch. 13, 10 (Heb. and LXX) stands m 
place of n''n!?Nn piN Dy. Perhaps that was the original reading. 

8. N'-|pM] As 2, 16. LXX KoX iKkqQy], reading Nnp^l (or para- 

10. I^Dn?] Cf. ~I1D of turning aside into a house in Jud. 4, 18. 
18, 3. 19, II, 12. 15. 

by] Read 7N, as i Ch. 13, 13 ; cf. on I 13, 13. , 

JTia 'inD''l] and turned it aside lo the house, etc. Exactly so, Nu. 
22, 23 T'^T] nnbn!) priNn-nx Dyi?n y^, 

mN nay] The analogy of =innny, n^-iny, ^x^-nny, bx^ny (cf. EB. 
iii. 3284), and of the numerous Phoenician, Aramaic, and Arabic 
names compounded with "tay and s^ and the name of a deity ^ create 

^ LXX (Cod. B) omits the word : Cod. A and Luc. have tnl rfi wpoTreTfia, whence 
Jerome ' super temeritate.' But rashness is not the idea expressed by the root. 

2 Cf. the Phoen. mnc^ymy, mp^rDnay, p::'si3y, ^ymay (see further 

instances in CIS. I. p. 365 ; Lidzbarski, Nordsem. Epigraphik, 332-5 ; Cooke, 
NSI. 373). For Aram, names, see Lidzb. and Cooke, as cited : for Arabic names, 
Wellh.j^^^^e Arab. Ileidentums'^, pp. 2-4. The pr. n. DlXl^y occurs at Carthage 
{CIS. I. 295. 4) ; but without any further clues to its meaning than we possess for 

VI. j-ij 269 

a somewhat strong presumption that, though nothing more is at 
present known definitely about a god bearing this name, DIX in 
DHN liy is the name of a deity ^ : Obed-edom, it will also be remem- 
bered, was not an Israelite, but a Philistine. It is true, there are 
some names of this form, in which *73y, x^ is compounded into 
the name of a king^ (as nnim^y 'servant of Aretas,' Cooke, NSI. 
82. 5, cf. p. 224): Dix does not, however, seem to be a likely name 
for a king; and 'servant of men' is not a likely explanation of the 
name. In a few cases the second element in such names is perhaps 
the name of a tribe ^ ; so there remains the possibility that this is 
the case with D"iS' I3y. 

II. JT'n] JT'an T'no (see on I 12, 5); and so II 13, 20; but in 
each case unnecessarily: see p. 37 n. 2. 

13. As both We. and Keil rightly observe, the Hebrew states only 
that a sacrifice was offered, w^hen those bearing the ark had advanced 
six steps : as soon, namely, as it appeared that it could be moved 
from the resting-place with impunity, the sacrifice was offered, partly 
as a thanksgiving that God's anger had been appeased, and partly 
as an inauguration of the ceremony that was to follow. In order 
to express that a sacrifice was offered at every six steps, the Hebrew 
would have read nin . . . (nyv or) ny!»'^ DN ,Tni (Gen. 31, 8; Nu. 
21, 9: Tenses, § 136 8 Obs.). 

14. "ID"ID?3] Only here and v. 16 : was circling about. 
in TlDX] See on I 2, 18. 

15. D^^yo] were bringing tip: note the ptcp. 

1S1C' Spni nynnn] Cf. Amos 2, 2 isiji' ^ipa nynnn (of the shout 
of victory) : also Jos. 6, 5 for a similar combination, i/^. 47, 6 (though 
the Psalm itself belongs to a much later date) appears to be based 
on this verse : isic' ^ipa nin^ nynn3 D^^i?^' n^y. The nsi^i^ was not 

a metal 'trumpet,' but a horn: see the writer's Joel a7id Amos (in the 
Cambr. Bible), pp. 144-6. 

the Heb. D~lS lay. The title DIN "J^D, applied to a king {CIS. I. p. 365), does 
not throw any light upon it. 

1 Comp. W. R. Smith, Rel. Se7>i? 42 f. ; EB. iii. 3462 n. 

2 Noldeke, in Euting's A'abat. Inschrifteit (1885), p. 32 f . ; Wellh. I.e. p. 4. 

3 \Yellh. /. c. ; cf. Cooke, p. 224. 

270 The Second Book of Samuel, 

16. n\ni] I Ch. 15, 29, correctly, NTl. Cf. on I i, 12. 
-|>y] Prefix ny with LXX (cws), and i Ch. 15, 29. 

"0">3D1 TTSD] leaping (lit. shewing agility) and circling about. Both 
uncommon words: TTS Gen. 49, 24! in Qal; as Arabic shews, to 
be active or agile, i Ch. 15, 30 substitutes more ordinary words, TplD 
pntJ'01 : skipping (i/^. 1 14, 4. 6 ; Job 21, 11) znd playing (v. 5). 

18. nhyn] Collectively (comp. D"'bsn Ez. 33, 21 ; 3Dnri often, etc.): 
cf. the plural, v. 17. 

19. ... 5J'"'N!d!'] In the II I Ch. 16, 3 the more ordinary C^'no 
rvi^^a. iyi (I 22, 19 al.) is substituted. The idiom p^ is, however, fully 
justified, not only by Ex. 11, 7. 2 Ch. 15, 13, but also by its use 
in other analogous expressions, for the purpose of denoting the 
terminus a quo in space or time (7, 6) ; see Thes. s. v. |d ; Lex. 583**. 

niri] Elsewhere only in P, Ex. 29, 2 etc. (13 times). 

"IDC'n] The meaning of this word, which occurs besides only in the 
II I Ch. 16, 3, is quite unknown. As Lagarde points out \, so-called 
'tradition' is here remarkably at variance with itself — (a) LXX in 
Sam. la-)(a.piTr]v '^ , in Ch. (apTov cVa) apTOKoiriKov (Luciau KoWvpirriv^) ; 
{b) Aq. Symm. afxvpLT-qv* ; {c) Vujg. Sam. assaturam bubulae carnis 
unam, Ch. partem assae carnis bubulae ; {d) Pesh. Sam. )ltno.> [frus- 
tum carnis^), Ch. 1m>* Jl^sXso {portio una); {e) Targ. Sam. *in 31^2; 
Ch. (late) N-nnn xn5^'^< p nn 3^a (= a sixth part of a bullock) ^• 
(/") Abu'l Walid, col. 742 (Rouen gloss) *i» rt.« \is (segmentum cartjis) ; 
{g) Rashi (in agreement with Targ. Ch.) 133 \W\:^^ THN ; {h) Kimchi 
"WIO nnx p?n, but mentioning also as a possible explanation the 
view of the Rabbis {Pesahim 36^), also found in Targ. Ch. and Rashi, 
that it is a compound word (n?|')1^ "^^P) signifying "iM IX^^I iriN. 
It is evident that these renderings are either conjectures based upon 

^ Mittheilungen, i. (1884), p. 214. 

^ IDK^X probably read as "lati'K : cf. Spiiravov for pTi I 13, 21 ; tokos for ']h 
\\i. 72, 14 al., etc. (comp. p. 78 «.). 

3 Or Xdyavov Trjjavov. But the renderings of 'ISC'N and HC'^ti'K have apparently 
been transposed : for Xdyavov dwu Trjydvov = n{J'''K'X in Samuel. 

* ' Vox aliunde incognita, cuius loco dfxopirrjs ( = ^B'''J^'^{ i Ch. LXX) ex dii6pa 
(quod Hesychio est aefjuSaXn eipOrj aw fj.e\iTi, Athenaeo autem fieXirwiM irenfft- 
fxevov) fortasse reponendum' (Dr. Field). 

^ = nn3 Ez. 24, 4 (Payne Smith, T/ies. s.v.). 

« Cf. the marg. of the Reuchl. Cod. (Lagarde, p. xix, 3) ^<-|'ln3 NIT'IJ' fD in. 

VI. 1 6-20 271 

the context, or depend upon an absurd etymology, as though "ISK'N 
were in some way compounded of ]^^ and "IS and meant the sixth 
part of a bullock ! Upon Kimchi's explanation are based the render- 
ings of Seb. Miinster (1534-5), 'frustum carnis unum;' of the 
Geneva Bible (1560), 'a piece of flesh;' and of RV. AV. 'a good 
piece (of flesh) ' depends evidently on a combination of "iDK'N with 
IS^i. but the application of the root, in such a connexion, is ques- 
tionable; granting that ~is::>N = ' something fair,' its employment to 
denote in particular ' a fair piece of flesh ' is not a probable specializa- 
tion of its meaning. Lud. de Dieu, perceiving the impossibility of the 
Rabbinical etymology, endeavoured to reach the same general sense 
by a derivation from the Ethiopic t\&,i.\ safara, to measure, ffofl^C^: 
mas/art, measure (Matth. 7, 2 al.), supposing IDK'N to have thus 
denoted ' dimensam sacrificii partem unam, quantum nempe unius 
sextae partis, in quas sacrificium aequaliter dividi solebat, mensura 
continebat.' Ges. and Roed. (in Thes.) adopt the same derivation, 
though not limiting the 'measure,' as was done by De Dieu, to 
a particular fraction of the sacrifice. But irrespectively of the fact 
pointed out by Lagarde that Eth. rt<L<S;=Heb. "ISD (not 135^), the 
sense obtained is insufficient and lame : between two words denoting 
distinctly two kinds of food, the narrator would have placed a word 
denoting simply ' a measure ' — ' a cake of bread, a measure, and a cake 
of raisins' — both the amount, and the nature, of the substance 
measured being left undefined. Under such circumstances, it is 
wisest to acknowledge that we do not know what the word means, 
and cannot propose for it a plausible etymology ^ 

nC''''^*x] II, Hos. 3, I. Cant. 2, 5t. Either raisin-cakes [Thes.), or 
(Kennedy, EB. ii. 1569) cakes 0/ dough kneaded with grapes. 

20. "1333 nJO] How the king hath got him honour to-day . . . ! (Not 
' How honourable was . . . ,' which would be the ptcp. "l^^a. ' Glorious ' 
of EVV. destroys the point of David's reply at the end of v. 23, where 
the same verb is rendered ' had in honour.') For the medial sense of 

1 Cf. in the Michlol Yophi (Dan. 4, 24) T^bx? "(SC^'' ''3^0 JD HC ^n ^""1 IN- 

2 Ewald's roast meat {Hist. iii. 127), from "lDK' = fllK', is very improbable, 
both on account of the \^ = '^, and because ^"1^ is not to roast, but to dum up. 

272 The Second Book of Samuel, 

IHDJ, to get oneself honour (GK. § 51®), cf. Ex. 14, 4. 17. 18. Ez. 
28, 22 al. 

ninJ2N] ncx is the one noun in Heb., in which the plur. is enlarged 
by the addition of n (niHDN). 

In the cognate languages we have ^ — 

jr^:^/: \i^r, ^^^^^. \ iLlfl fathers. 

\t'<y^\ '"'Cv'^v) ^^^\ mothers. 

jl'^io^^ nnnjDK (but Arab. iL]5-^0 bondmaids. 

)o»v>.» husbands' mothers. 

jl'ot^/ hands (in fig. sense, supports^ 

)lo^^aA., ^'C'i^^?') Jok-^^*' names. 

|npy (and }py) beams (from py = I?X = }*y : p. 9), Sachau, Aram. 
Papyrus aus Elephantine (1911), i, 11. 3, 10. 

Mand. nnxniSOy (from sing. NTISiD = Jl^la^)) lips^. 

<1jC{.\ Z (and i^\ySS) years. 

J^[.l.J..c- (and eyll--i.c), sLI^ thorn-trees (from a.-1c). 

Phoen. r\rhn {NSI. 9, 3; from bl 20, A, 5, cf ij/. 141, 3) rt't'cirj. 

DvJi] Upon analogy of the construction with the finite verb, this 
would be the mf abs., which is written four times with n — probably, zf 
the forms are correct, for the sake of the assonance (Kon. i. 536 ; GK. 
§ 75"; cf Maurer, ap. Th. here) niriB' Is. 22, 13: niS"} 42, 20 Qrg 
(Kt. n^io); '"1^^? Hos. 10, 4; ni^y Hab. 3, 13 (Pnnj;): for the form 
of the tnf abs. with 3, cf. N"lp3 (i, 6), ^Nf 3 (I 20, 6), fl??, etc. Ewald, 
however, § 240", supposes the tnf abs. to have passed into the iff. c. 
by a species of attraction, under the influence of the preceding D ; 
and this is not, perhaps, impossible. No other case of the inf. c. 
being strengthened by the mf. abs. seems to occur : so we are not in 
a position to say whether n^33 nv3n3 or rii?3i ni?2n3 is more in 
accordance with usage. GK. § 75y treats nibj as a faulty repetition 
of m^;n. 

D''p"in] So Jud. 9, 4. II, 3. (LXX Twv 6pxov/x.eVa)v=Q"!i?^'j).) For 
ins', see on 2, 18. 

1 Cf. Noldeke, SBAlz. 1882, p. 1178 f. 

^ Comp. S13N my fattiers, Cooke, NSI. 63, 16 (from Zenjirli). 

^ Cf. Noldeke, Mdnddische Gramm., pp. 171, 172. 

FI. 20-22 2^]^ 

2 1. nin* ^JQ^] LXX after nin'" expresses ni.T' Tim npnx (Luc. 
nirr '•n). The words will have fallen out of MT. by o/AotoTeXenTov 
(Th, We. etc.). HplN is needed for the sense ; and the whole may be 
genuine : but neither '^ ^"na nor ''• Tl seems required ; and the 
variation between them rather suggests (Klo. Bu. Kit. ap. Kautzsch) 
that each was a later addition, made in different MSS. : the scribe 
of the archetype of MT. and the other versions passed from ''* to '', 
and omitted both the genuine lp"iN and the addition ^'' (^n) "ina. 

T^ai] Some 30 MSS. and LXX (ets) Tiib, which is better; cf. 
I 25, 30. 

22. The verse is difficult. It is best to begin it with 2it> ^npHB'l. 
(a) Ew. We. Now.: 'And if (Jer. 20, 9 : Tenses, § 148; cf. on 19, 3) 
I play before Yahweh, 22 I count myself still too small for this 
(to play before Him), and am abased in mine own eyes ; and with 
the bondmaids (slave-girls) whom thou hast spoken of, with //lem 
should I seek (?) to get me honour ? ' David says that he is unworthy 
to play and dance before Yahweh, and the opinion which the slave- 
girls entertain of him is of no consequence, {d) Th. Sm. Bu. Dh., 
and substantially EW. : 'And I will play before Yahweh, 22 and will 
be yet more looked down upon than this (more than I have been 
to-day), and will be abased in mine eyes (LXX, Th. Sm. Bu. Dh., 
more pointedly, "in /h'ne eyes"); but with the bondmaids of whom 
thou hast spoken, with tAem I shall be had in honour.' Michal's 
taunt that he had degraded himself in the eyes of the bondmaids, 
David says, is unfounded : he might be still more despised by her, 
and they would nevertheless, he feels sure, continue to honour him. 
{&) is preferable. Both renderings require "l?!'* for n"T32N: the 
cohortative is out of place ; in (a), though retained by Ew. We. Now., 
it is inconsistent (in spite of Now.) with the question, in (J)) it is 
inconsistent with the fact that not a wish, but a conviction, is what 
the context requires. For ^n?p3, cf. 7/p in Qal to be looked down 
upon (Gen. 16, 4. 5 ; I 2, 30, opp. 1??^, cf. here mQDS), and in Hif. 
to contemn (Is. 23, 9 X^^"^ '"'l!??^"''? ^^J)?)- ''??' is abased, brought 
low; cf. Job 5, II, and the verb in Ez. 21, 31(36). Dy with=. 
before, in the sight of, almost=in the judgement of (I 2, 26). IB'K 
mDN, cf. on I 24, 5. Djoy . . , ny, the resumption for the sake of 

1 1RH T 

274 The Second Book of Samuel^ 

emphasis, exactly as with riN Dt. 13, i. Is. 8, 13; p Lev. 25, 44^; 
1 Ez. 18, 24 al. (Tenses, § 123 Obs^. 

N.B. EVV. by vile in this verse do not mean morally detestable, but simply 
common, looked down upon: see on 15, 9 (p. 125 k.). In the same way base does 
not mean ignoble in character, but merely low in position , as often in Old English : 
so e.g. in Ez. 17, 14. 29, 14. Mai. 2,9. 2 Cor. 10, i AV. (RV. lowly). See 
further Base and Vile in DB. 

23. n^ iTn vh , , , by^rh^] rh resumes ^a^O^I, as WOV resumes DJ? 
in V. 22, but in an z^wemphatic position, and merely for the purpose 
of lightening the sentence : see on I 9, 20 ; and cf. Lev. 25, 46^. 

n?''] The Oriental text has *l^J, which is also found in some 
Western MSS. and edd., and is the general reading in Gen. 11, 3ot. 
If in either of these passages it is correct, the primitive form with 1 
(Ur , (D^^s) will have not entirely fallen out of use in Hebrew. 

7. Nathan s prophecy to David. David's thanksgiving 
and prayer. 
Ch.l = i Ch. 17. 

7, I. Va^K ^30 3"'3DD li'TT'Jn] A Deuteronomic expression: Dt. 
12, 10. 25, 19. Jos. 23, I (in a section of Joshua belonging to the 
Deuteronomic editor): cf. 3''1DD '7 n^lTi Jos. 21, 42. i Ki. 5, 18. 

2. nynM] collectively, as n^iyn 6, 18 : in I Ch. 17, I niyn'' (We.). 

3. "123^ T^N ija] I 9, 19. 14, 7 (MT. ; see note): cf. also 2, 35 

(••aa^n nc'Na), and 2 Ki. 10, 30. 

5. . . . nriNn] shouldest thou . . . ? Chron., explicitly, nns X? ; so 
LXX, Pesh. here. 

6. DrDi?] So, with infin., Jud. 19, 30. Is. 7, 17!. . . . "ll^'5< DVn |10^ 
z*. II. Dt. 4, 32. 9, 7. Jer. 7, 25. 32, 31. Hag. 2, i8t. Comp. on 
19, 25 ; and see Z(?.»:. 583^ 9 b. 

\yi;'oy\ ^nsn "i!?nno n\nN')] i Ch. 17, 5 pc^'D»1 ^nx ^n ^ns'o n\nNi. 

But LXX in Ch. has only Kat ^/xt/v cv crKrjvrj koI iv KaXvfjifxaTL. HMSI 
"l^nniD expresses forcibly the idea of continuance. 

7. ''t33K'] Read, with i Ch. 17, 6, ""pst^. There is no indication 
of any tride having been commissioned to govern Israel. Keil, object- 
ing that, had ^ODK* stood originally in this passage, the substitution 
of ^DSB' would be inexplicable, does not sufficiently allow for the 

VI. 22 — VIl. 12 275 

accidental confusion of letters, — a confusion against which even the 
best-preserved text is not invariably proof: I 14, 18 Keil himself 
is not unwilling to accept ""isi? instead of MT. '>yy\ . 

8. niin] See on 15, 25. Notice the separate pron. ^JN. 

-1^^<D] 'The very rare inxo (instead of 'inNO, cf. i Ch. 17, 7 
[■•"iriN'JD]) is remarkably confirmed, just for the present passage, by 
i/'. 78, 71 in>m ijxiK'ui wy apy^a niyni? ix^nn m^y -inNo' (We.). 

9^. ^nj^yi] The prophet here turns to the future. 

'^na after DC is absent rightly in LXX, and i Ch. 17, 8; for it 
weakens the force of the following words, out of which it might easily 
have arisen ' (We.). 

10. vnnn]=?« Us place: see on I 14, 9; and cf. Is. 25, 10. 46, 7; 
Zech. 12, 6 (Klo.). 

TiT"] be disquieted. Be moved (RV.) suggests a wrong sense, which 
has misled the author of the note in the RV. with marginal references 
to refer to 2 Ki. 21, 8 (where the verb is ^^3n). 

n^Jiy ^:3] 3, 34, and in the citation x\,. 89, 23 (ijjy vb ^h^^ pi). 

11. \rh'\\ "1 is not expressed in LXX; both the sentence and the 
sense are improved by its omission : ' shall no more afflict it as afore- 
time from the day when I appointed judges,' etc. As the text stands, 
the reference in lo^ will be to the sufferings of Egypt; but this is 
a thought alien to the context, in which rather the blessings secured 
by the settled government of David are contrasted with the attacks to 
which Israel was exposed during the period of the Judges. 

T3*N-^3D ni? ^nn^Jm] Ew. We. etc. ra^X-^D li?, ' and I will give it 
rest from all its enemies,' in better agreement with the context. 

II l>. Here Nathan comes to the main subject of his prophecy — 
the promise relating not to David himself, but to his posterity, and the 
declaration that it is not David who will build a house for Yahweh, but 
Yahweh who will build a house (i.e. a family) _/i?r David. 

ni.T "p "Tiini] The pf. with simple waw is not what would be 
expected, i Ch. 17, 10 has lb n?X1; a slighter change would be (Kit.) 

12. TO^ 1x^0^ ^3] Prefix ^^^1, reading either (LXX) ,Tm H^ r\m\ 
or (i Ch. 17, 11) ,Tni : niiT "j^ nc>y\ 

Ty»» N^ ■^K'X] 16, II. Gen. 15, 4t. 

276 The Second Book of Samuel, 

13-15. Though V. 13 was fulfilled by Solomon, the terms are 
general — even in this verse Xin points back not to "132 but to "jyif 
— and the reference is to the line of David's descendants, of which 
it is said that if, in the person of any of its individual members, it 
commits iniquity it will be punished, as men in general are punished, 
but Yahweh's favour will not be withdrawn from it permanently, as 
it was withdrawn from Saul. Hence z;. 16 the promise of perpetuity 
is conferred upon it. Comp. i Ki. 2, 4. xp. 89, 31-38. 132, 12, 
where the terms of Nathan's prophecy are expressly interpreted of 
David's sotis ^ 

14. 'y\ D''C'JS D3K^3] i.e. with punishments such as all men incur 
when they sin, and from which the seed of David will not be exempted. 
Comp. the poetical paraphrase, t/^. 89, 31-34. 

15. niD"" S^] LXX and i Ch. 17, 13, more pointedly: TDK ^. 
T'js^D "•m-'Dn "IK'S hxt^* oyo "mon ik^nd] LXX here Tii'-Dn -ib'W 

■•JS^O TlT'Dn nC'NO : Ch. I^ja^ iTH -IB'iSO "TIT'DH 'W^'2. The repetitmi 
of '•nT'Dn is not an elegancy, and the non-mention of Saul's name 
would seem certainly to be original : on these grounds Berth. We. 
Bu. etc. prefer the reading of Chronicles. 

16. T^si?] LXX, better, ''32?; cf vv. 26. 29; and \\i. 89, 37b. 
19. Pn] zvilh reference to, as I 3, 12. 

pimo^] from afar, i.e. long before the history of liny DU was 
completed: comp. 2 Ki. 19, 25 (=Is. 37, 26). 'It was not enough 
in Thine eyes to honour me : Thy regard extends also to my house, 
and even in view of the distant future.' \u7 as v. 6. 

DINH mm nxn] As the text stands, the best explanation is that 
of Hengsienberg and Keil : ' and this is the law for men,' i.e. to 
evince such regard for me is in accordance with the law prescribed 

1 V. 13 is in any case parenthetic, even if it be not, as We. supposes {Comp. des 
HexP' 257), a subsequent insertion in the prophecy. Elsewhere in the promise 
house has the sense of 'family' {^v. 11. 16: and on w. 18. 19. 25. 26. 27. 29), 
and the point of the whole prophecy is not that Solomon rather than David is to 
be the builder of the house for Yahweh, but (as stated above) that it is not David 
who is to build a house for Yahweh, but Yahweh who will build a house for 
David. V. 14 ff. describe how David's descendants will be dealt with in such 
a manner as to give effect to this promise ; and the reference to the material 
temple in z'. 13 interferes with the just sequence of the thought. 

VII. 13-2) 277 

by God to regulate men's dealings with one another (not as Kp.) ; 
displayed by God, therefore, it argues unwonted condescension and 
affection. (' This is the manner — mos, consuetudo — of men,' Ges. 
Th., gives to min a sense which it never has, and which would rather 
be expressed by £2D*^D.) But Hengst.'s explanation is artificial : 
and there is no doubt that the text is incorrect. Ch. has IIDD ''jn''S">1 
n^yon DINH, which is more obscure than the text here, and indeed 
cannot be intelligibly construed. We., following a suggestion of 
Ewald's, Hist. iii. 180 (E. T. 132), would read D^Nn nnh >\^iril 'and 
hast let me see the generations of men,' i.e. given me a glimpse into 
the fortunes of my descendants. But if descendants had been meant, 
would not the idea have been expressed distinctly? No satisfactory 
emendation of the passage has been proposed. 

21. *in?31 Tin "113^3] The combination of two such disparate 
ideas is very un-Hebraic. LXX here, and i Ch. 17, 19 have T^^V 
for Tla^. This is certainly an improvement. We. would also drop 
^37D1, remarking that the fact that in LXX (8ia tov Zovkov a-ov 

TTtirovqKa^ \_Ka\ Kara ttjv KapStav crov €7roti^cras] ktX.) TreTrotT^Kas has no 

obj., is an indication that the bracketed words are a later addition, 
so that the original LXX did not read "jab^l. Nesde {Marg. p. 16), 
retaining 13731, points out that in i Ch. 17, 18 { = v. 20 here) there 
are found between ybn and nn) the words "lt3y-nx 1133? (which, 
as thus read, cannot be construed : RV. is a resort of desperation) ; 
and, supposing them to be misplaced in Ch., utilizes them as a 
beginning for j-. 21, viz. n^'J'V 13^31 ri-isT Tsrnx n??!),— p3n -n3y3 
being a corruption of m3T Tl3y: so Sm. Bu. This reads excellently; 
and may well have been the original text : w-e can hardly say more. 

n^nj] The word does not occur besides except in late Hebrew 
(i Ch. 29, Esther, ip. 71. 145). The meaning of the expression 
' done a/I this greatness ' is here (unlike v. 23) obscure; and the verse 
is greatly improved by the transposition proposed by Reifmann : 
nNtn nSiJn-i53 nx in3y nx ynin^ (n^'y absol., as Is. 48, n al.). 

22. DNn^N niiT] 'This stands in Ch. everywhere for TWrV "^Mi. of 
our text: here and v. 25 it has found its way into this as well, as 
in I 6, II. 17 onnu' (We.). 

23. Geiger {Urschri/t, p. 288) and We., partly following LXX 

278 The Second Book of Samuel, 

and I Ch. 17, 21, suppose the original text to have been: *]DyD "'01 
'h DiB'^1 hvb "b T\r\th {vrh^ or) D^■^^^* ^^n "^i^^ P^^ "inx ^ia ^sity^ 
1 vn^Ni '•13 ioy ''Jsts k'ijJ' niNiiJi nSn? onb nityy^i dk^. ' On the one 
hand, the reference being to heathen gods, the sing. 'pr\ was changed 
to the pi. ID^n; on the other hand, a difficulty was found even in 
supposing that another god had chosen and done great things for 
a nation, and all was referred back again to the true God, hence 
1^ xmh in Ch. while Sam. has preserved "i^, hence also DD^ and 
yr\\:h in Sam., -joy with the addition DnVDO i^) nns "itTN [based 
on 1^ nna^ just above] in both, and finally, as not one nation merely 
but several were driven out before Israel, CIJ for ''1:, which, however, 
is not certain in the case of Sam. [on account of the suflT. in vn?K] ' 
(Geig.). Bu. Sm. Now. agree. It will be observed that while the 
question itself implies a reference to false gods, the terms in which 
it is put allude covertly to what has been done by the true God : 
hence the endeavour to accommodate them to it, if possible, explicitly. 
As regards the changes in detail, ^^n for I3^n is strongly supported 
by the 1^ following ^ : DH^ and C'lJ^ are both imperative — the former, 
because a word addressed to Israel is here out of place, the latter 
(as Chr.) in order to restore '•^sro to its right [be/ore in AV. RV. gives 
to ''3S?0* the sense of "^JD^ or '•ry^!], niXi131 ."i/njn is a combination 
as indifferent in style as mi^HDni nitJ'b in I 18, 6 (in support of the 
restored text see Dt. 10, 21: also i/^. 71, 19. 106, 21), and the 
enallage of numbers in rn^NI CU is alien to the practice of Hebrew 
prose. As regards the other expressions in the verse, with the 
opening question, comp. Dt. 4, 7. 34; with n^ 1^ tmh Jer. 32, 20; 
Is. 63, 12^ 14^; Neh. 9, 10; Dan. 9, 15 (all with nc'y: for DIB' cf. 
ch. 14, 7); and with "320 K'-i: Ex. 34, 11. Jos. 24, 18. 1//. 78, 55. 

1 Or DTI^NI D''13, after LXX i0vr) kuI <rKT)vib(AaTa (i.e. D^nPN, misread 


2 LXX wSTjfTjtrev avrbv = S2?'7\ has nothing to recommend it, and does not 
harmonize with the following nHD?. 

* In ''JED the sense of ]'0 is never lost : Lev. 19, 32 Dlpfl n2"'tJ* *3QD not merely 
to rise up zn the presence of C^SP) the hoary head, but to rise up from before 
it, out of respect for it ; Is. 26, 17 T'JDD li'i'TI p so were we— not in, hvX— through 
Thy presence. 

VII. 2}— VIII. I 279 

27. nij nx . . . S'i'O] found his heart, i.e. took courage (RV. m): 
cf. Lex. 3^ and 23^ 10, and phrases in Jer. 30, 21. Est. 7, 5; and 
for n:«3 )/^. 76, 6. 

28. . . . X"in nnx] Is. 37, 16. 43, 25. i/^. 44, 5 al. {Tenses, § 200). 
Vir"] «r^ hahiiually : but a verb is not here needed; and Ehrl. may- 
be right in reading mnv 

riDX] truthfulness,— \kit abstract subst. instead of the adj. : so 
"imn (wflj) n\"l nox Dt. 22, 20. i Ki. 10, 6; without iTn, i Ki. 17, 
24 ; also \^. 19, 10. 119, 142. 151 al. {ib. § 189. 2 ; GK. § 141°). 

29. ^Nin] <5.? willing. ^''Nin is to wzV/ (I 12, 22), — with different 
nuances, as to he willing, agree (Ex. 2, 21), to resolve, undertake (Gen. 
18, 27. Dt. I, 5), to be determined (Jud. i, 27. 35. Hos. 5, 1 1). Comp. 
MooxQ, fudges, p. 47 ; Lex. 384*. 

ina^^o] ]'a = through, from, in consequence of: Ges. Thes. 803b; 

Lex. 580a. Cf. Is. 28, 7 pn-;n lyb:. 

8. Summary of David's wars; and list of his ministers. (Close of 
the history of David's />«(5/i<: doings; comp. I 14, 47-51 of Saul.) 

Ch. 8 = 1 Ch. 18. 

8, I. nCNn jn?D nx] The expression is peculiar : but apparently, 
if the text is correct, the meaning is, ' the bridle of the mother-city ' 
(so Ges. Ke. Stade), i.e. the authority of the metropolis or capital. 
DN in Phoenician has the sense of mother-city or capital ; see the coin 
figured in Ges. fesaia, i. p. 755 { = Monum. Phoen., Tab. 34 N ; p. 262) 
nyn DX "i^fi?'; Cooke, NSL pp. 350, 352 B 15; Lidzbarski, Nord- 
sem. Epigr. p. 219. »/ has the same meaning in Syriac (PS. 222). 
DX in ch. 20, 19 may also be compared : and it may be remembered 
how nm is often used in the sense of dependent cities or villages 
(Nu. 21, 25 al.). Comp. also Jos. 14, 15 LXX /Ar/rpoTroAis roiv 
EvaKa/A (similarly 15, 13. 21, 11), i.e. ^^^^^ DX (regarded by some 
as the original reading : Moore, fudges, p. 25). ni2X appears here 
to be the fern, of DX, and to be used in the same metaph. sense, 
jno bridle, metaph. of authority, jurisdiction ; cf. in Arabic the use 

1 In |y3D3 DX X^ix'pb {Mon. Phoen., Tab. 35), also cited in the first edition, 
the true reading appears to be CX ('which') for DX: Cooke, «?/. cit. pp. 46«., 
349. 350- 

28o The Second Book of Samuel^ 

of llij a nose-rein, bridle: Schultens, on Job 30, 11 (quoted by Ges. 
s.v. nJ2N), cites from Hist. Tarn. [II 228 Manger] \J^\.^j ^Tj-^y^ol^ 
holding the bridle of those (countries), with other exx. ; see also Lane, 
Arab. Lex. p. 1249. i Ch. 18, i for nONH JDO has HTII^ni nj, 
' Gath and her daughters ' (dependent villages), apparently reading, 
or interpreting, 3nD asn5, and supposing 'Gath the mother' to include 
her dependencies. The Versions render no help. LXX r^v d<^topi- 

a-fJievrjv (.? "^^'15^'? ; to. d^aj/3tcr/AeVa = D''^"J3'? JoS. 1 4, 4 al.) ; Aq. rov 

XaXivov Tov v8pay(jiyLov (from the Syr. sense of ncx Sir. 24, 30 : cf. 
Theod. vSpayoyyov in c/i. 2, 24); Symm. t-qv l^ova-iav Tov cf)6pov, 
whence Yulg./renum tributi ; Targ. NJICN Jlpn; Pesh. )oa«^tsj»». 

2. /3n3] On the art., see on I 19, 13; and on the _/<■;«. \nni (cf. 
vv. 5. 6), on I 17, 21. 

aaKTl] The inf. abs., defining how David 'measured' them, as 
I 3, 12 : Ew. § 280^; GK. § w-^. 

nn30] Cf. I Ki. 5, I. The word denotes properly a complimentary 
present, — in different applications. As a sacrificial term, of the parti- 
cular gift known as the ' meal-ofifering : ' in a connexion such as the 
present, of gifts oifered to a prince or other person, whose good-will 
it is desired to secure, whether voluntarily (Gen. 32, 14. 43, 15. 2 Ki. 
8, 8), or as something expected or exacted (as here), so that it nearly 
= tribute. 

3. "iTyTin], Some 50 MSS., many edd., LXX (A8/3aa^ap), Pesh., 
Vulg., read "iry^in. That "itynn is right ' appears from a recently 
found Aramaic seal with the inscription "lIy^^^?, in which T and T are 
clearly distinguished ^' Comp. also the Assyrian equivalent (Schrader, 
KAT? p. 201 ; cf.^ p. 446) Dad'idri, '■^'t:r\'r\r\ Zech. 12, 11, and the 
n. pr. nnrrp. Hadad was the name of the chief deity of the 
Aramaeans, identified by the Assyrians with Ramman, and hence 
probably the god of storm and thunder (Cooke, NSI. pp. 164, 360). 
This name, therefore, as pointed, will signify Hadad is help : cf. "'Tyi'' 
Yah is help, and "".^i^V^. The vocalization of LXX would suggest 
the form IVI'^H (like ^'^^\% etc.) Hadad helpeth. 

^ Baethgen, Beitrdge etc., p. 67 ; Euting, Berichte der Bert. Akad. 1885, p. 679 
( = Epigr. Miscellen, p. 11). See CIS. II. i. No. 1 24. Cf. PRE? vii. 288-291. 

VIII. 2-9 28i 

naiv] here and z;. 5 [=i Ch. 18, 3. 5]. 12. 10, 6 and 8 (N31V). 

23, 36. I 14, 47. I Ki. II, 23 (nniv 1/D irymn). i Ch. 18, 9. 19, 6 

[=KniV f/^. 10, 6]. 2 Ch. 8, 3 (na^^ non). ^. 60, 2 (from f/^. 8, I2)t. 

'2, IT" 2''::'n^] The phrase is difficult, and affords no satisfactory 
sense. 71? T" 3"'C'n means to turn one hand against {km. 1, 8. \^. 81, 
15 ; Ez. 38, 12), and though '2 'V y^r\ might have a similar sense, 
this would not suit with the object inja. And though T* in itself 
might be used mti2iT^\\. = domi?iion, IT 3''K'n certainly could not express 
the idea ' recover his dominion : ' for 2''D'n with "V would suggest not 
the idea of regaining, restoring, but simply of bringing back, with 
which the metaphorical sense of T» would not harmonize. Hence it is 
best to read with i Ch. 18, 3 in"' 2''Vni?, i.e. either to stablish his hand, 
fig. for his dominion, or, perhaps (cf. I 15, 12 T> 17 3"'VtD ; ch. 18, 18), 
to set up his monument of victory (Symm. rpoTraiov) : so Gottheil, 
ZAW. 1906, 277 ff. (where numerous examples are cited of such 
stelae set up by the Assyrian kings). The subject will be Hadad'ezer. 

nn:n] (Kt. "^nj?) 'by the River,' sc. kot l^oxqvy i-^- the Euphrates 
(see 10, 16; so e.g. Gen. 31, 31. ^. 72, 8 — always in this sense with 
a capital R in RV.). The Qre JTJS "in^a agrees with LXX here and 
with I Ch. 18, 3. 

4. 33in] A collective, — here, unusually, denoting i\\t chariot-horses. 

5. 'b iryb] '^ as 2 1, 17 ; and frequently with the same verb in late 
books (especially Chronicles). 

6. □''a'^VJ] See on I 13, 3. 

7. anrn '•D^C'] On vh^, see esp. W. E. Barnes, Exp. Times, x. 
42-5 (Oct. 1898), cf. p. 188. 

^x] = ^y (on I 13, 13); for ^y n\n, of things worn, cf. Ex. 28, 43. 
Not that belonged to: 7N is not used in the sense of 7. 
7^. 8^3. On the additions here in LXX, see We. 

8. ntoaoi] I Ch. 18, 8 nnaoroi — and this order of consonants is 
supported by LXX here Ik t^s Mao-paK. Cf. Gen. 22, 24 (^3^). 

^mnoi] I Ch., strangely, |13pV 

9. 10. "lyn] I Ch. 18, 9. 10 lyn, as also LXX {®ovov), the more 
probable form philologically. The termination 1- characterizes many 
Semitic proper names, especially of the tribes bordering on Canaan 

282 The Second Book of Samuel, 

(e.g. in Nabataean, 1jy3, r\\ \orhl, 13^0, etc.; €oi)ke, NSI. p. 214): 
cf. in OT. lOK'J the ' Arabian.' It is the Arabic nominative termina- 
tion (cf. p. 18). 

9. non] a large and important town in ancient times, and also 
now {Hama), on the Orontes, some 120 miles N. of Damascus. 

10. mi"'] I Ch. 18, 10 Dinn, supported, at least in part, by LXX 
here ('leSSoupav). Originally, no doubt, Q"!"|1l!. 

13"l3?l] i.e. to congratulate him: I 25, 14. i Ki. i, 47 i^Lex. 139*). 

■•yn niDni'O B'''N] 'a man-of-battles of Toi ' = a man engaged often 
in conflict with Toi: for the construction, comp. Gen. 14, 13 vyi 
DinN nn3; Dt. i, 41 inon^o 'h'2; Is. 41, 12 nriDn^D "•tt'JN; 56, 7 
"Ti^sn JTia; ch. 23, I i^NTk.*'* nn^DT D^yj; and see Ew. § 2918'; GK. 
§ 13511. LXX appears to express liynnb 7\'^r\ nion^rD f^K ^3; but 
mon?D 5J'^N (Is. 42, 13. I Ch. 28, 3) is merely a warrior, not an 

12. D^ND] 9 MSS., LXX, Pesh. Ch. DnK», probably rightly. 

13. Dtr . , . K^yi] Cf. Gen. 11, 4 D^ "i:^ HK'yJI, where Delitzsch 
argues that DC, from the context, requires a more concrete sense 
than 'name,' and would render — in accordance with the supposed 
primary meaning of DtJ>, something lofty, conspicuous — 'monument,' 
comparing the present passage (as also Is. 56, 5. 55, 13) for a similar 
sense. But whatever ihe primitive meaning of d:j>, it is in actual usage 
so largely and constantly ' name,' even in conjunction with TWV (see 
the references on 7, 23), that it is difficult to think that it can have 
a different sense here. It is safest, therefore, to render ' gat him 
a name,' comparing the similar phrase ?'>n tJ'yi used of Saul, I 14, 48. 
It will be observed that in the text as emended (see the following 
note) W^ tJ'y^l is connected with David's victory (either over Edom, 
or over Syria), not as in MT. with his return after the victory, when 
his ' fame ' would have been already made, and the erection of 
a monument to commemorate it might have been rather supposed 
to be referred to. 

n^D N^33 D^N-n^? imano nt^a] i Ch. 18, 12 nan ,ti-iv J3 ''K>3N1 
n^DH ^<^Jn nnNTiN ; i/^. 60 title rbm N'-n dhntin t-i nxv ncr'^i. ms 
(supported also by LXX, Pesh. here) is unquestionably the true 
reading before n7»n S*a : for this valley was near Edom (see 2 Ki. 14, 7), 

VI 11. ^-ly 283 

and far from the scene of the Syrians' defeat. Even, however, with 
DIN for DIN, the text is still defective : for v. 14 presupposes a positive 
statement of the victory over Edom in v. 13, and not merely a notice 
of what David did when he returned from smiting it. Keil would read 
n^D N^n mN-nx in Q"iN-nN iniino nt^'a, supposing the three words 
added to have dropped out through the (virtual) homoioteleuton : Bu. 
Now. ms-nx nan d-intin niano intrni; We., with LXX (cV tw 

dvaKa/MTTTctv oxtov eTrara^cv), ^yyi\ ^''33 DINTIN ilSri UtJ'ni, which 
does not, however, account so well for the existing text (iniana for 
nan) ; Sm., deviating least from MT., n^n N'':2 mxTiN innnn intra 
(' on his returning, in that he smote,' etc.). In any case, as We. 
observes, in here is more original than either Joab (t/^.) or Abishai 
(Ch.) ; for throughout the summary which this chapter contains every- 
thing is ascribed to David personally, and DC' *in C'yi immediately 
precedes. For njDtr, here and Ch., x\i. 60, 2 has D''JK'. 

15-18. List of David's ministers. 

15- HK^y . . . ^T^J Cf. i Ki. 5, i. 24, and on I 2, nb. 18, 9. 

1 6. 1"'3ta] Probably not the recorder, but the king's remembrancer 
(cf, the verb in Is. 62, 6), who brought state-business to the king's 
notice, and advised him upon it. Cf. Recorder in DB. or EB. 

17. -in^nN-|3 l^D^nx] Read with Pesh. l^D^ns-p innx. Abiathar 
is mentioned before David's accession as priest : he is mentioned also 
during David's reign and at the beginning of Solomon's reign as 
priest; and though it is no doubt possible, as Keil suggests, that 
for some temporary cause, such as sickness, his place might have 
been taken by his son, it is not likely that in a formal and official 
list of David's ministers, his name should be superseded by that of 
his son. It is, indeed, not impossible that the transposition in the 
text was made intentionally: see We.'s note, i Ch. 24, 3. 6. 31 
(where Ahimelech is named by the side of Zadoq) are probably 
dependent upon this passage, after the original reading had become 
corrupted. Most modern scholars accept the correction. 

nng'] LXX Ao-a. In 20, 25 Kt. n^K^, Qre NIB' (LXX 'It/o-ous, 2ovs, 
2ovo-a), I Ch. 18, 16 NB^IK' (LXX 'l-qaov^), I Ki. 4, 3 NK'^K' (LXX 
^a/3a). rf-\^ is the form least attested of all : some such word as NB'B' 

284 The Second Book of Samuel, 

seems to be the most original. The vocalization must remain un- 
certain ; but shu is best attested. 

"iQD] scribe^ i.e., as we should say, secretary ; so RV. m. 

18. Tnam] For 1, read as in Ch. and the parallel passage ch. 
20, 23 7y. The body-guard of Ti^Dni Tiisn (who are mentioned, 
under this title, only during the reign of David : ch. 15, 18. 20, 7. 23 
QrS [see note], i Ki. i, 38. 44) must have been composed of 
foreigners, '•nian is in form a gentile noun, and occurs as such in 
I 30, 14 (see note), so that even on this ground alone a connexion 
with n''"iDn to cut off would be doubtful. "Tl^D can only be another 
gentile name ; it does not, however, occur except in this phrase, so 
that what nationality is denoted by it must remain uncertain. The 
supposition that it is contracted from ^riK'^a, though it has found 
some support from modern scholars, is not in accordance with 
philological analogy. 

CJriD] The Chronicler, unable to understand how any could be 
priests except sons of Aaron, paraphrases (i Ch. 18, 17) CiK^'Kin 
"I?cn *iv ; but the sense of |n3 is so uniform in Hebrew, that it is 
impossible to think that it can have expressed, to those who heard it, 
any idea but that which /r/^j/ would convey to us. There is no trace 
of the word having connoted any merely secular office : in Phoenician, 
Aramaic, and Ethiopic it has the same meaning as in Hebrew : in 
Arabic the corresponding word means a soothsayer. The etymology 
of fn^ is uncertain. To say that it is derived ' from a root meaning 
to serve or minister ' (Kp.) suggests an incorrect idea : in Heb. the root 
does not occur at alP; in Arabic kdhin (=|n3) is a soothsayer, and 
the verb means to give oracles ^. It has been thought possible that 
1^3 is derived from a by-form of P3 (cf. ^i^^ beside ^'^'0 ; Aram. T\T\3. 
beside t^^3), and hence may mean properly one who stands up with an 

^ The Pi'el |n3 is a denominative from |n3. 

2 The Arab, and Heb. senses of |n3 have a meeting-point in the early function 
of the Hebrew ' priest ' to give answers by the D''J2ni D^IN, or the HIDX (I .^o, 
7 f. etc. ; also Jud. 18, 4-6), as well as \.o pronounce authoritative decisions (niin) 
on cases submitted to him. Comp. Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures, 1882, pp. 67, 81-87 ; 
Wellhausen, Reste Arab. Heidentums, 130-134, 167 C131-138, 143); art. PRIEST 
in EB..I and Encycl. Brity^ xxii. 3i9''-32o''. 

VIIL ij—IX 285 

affair, manages, administers it (Fleischer, ap. Delitzsch on Is. 61, 10), 
or one who stands before Yahweh in serving Him (Stade, Gesch. 
i. 471 ; DB. iv. 67^). But there is no evidence that ^3 ever meant 
to 'standi' Whatever be the ultimate etymology of fnb, it was 
so limited by usage as to denote one who exercised certain sacred 
offices, whom we should term a spriest.' The word recurs, in the 
same application, 20, 26. i Ki. 4, 5. 

What relation, however, did these D^jn3 bear to the CiH^ of z;. 17 ? 
From 20, 26 (Tin^ jHD iTH), I Ki. 4, 5 (l^Dn nyn fna), it may be 
inferred that they stood in some special relation to the king. It seems 
not improbable that they were 'domestic priests '(Ew. Hist. iii. 367 [E.T. 
268]), appointed specially to perform religious offices for the king. 

In Egypt, we are told (Diod. Sic. i. 73), the king's responsible advisers were 
chosen from among the priests; and Delitzsch^ supposed that the office here 
referred to was one to which members of the priesthood had the first claim, but 
which was sometimes conferred upon others, of good family, but not of priestly 
descent. But in Egypt the king's advisers were priests : is it likely that David, in 
establishing his court, would have adopted a title denoting a minister by a qualifi- 
cation which he did not possess? It has also been supposed {DB. iv. 73'') that the 
title was adopted in imitation of the Phoenicians, among whom members of the royal 
family often filled priestly offices (cf. Introd. § i, the Inscription of Tabnith). 
But these members of the royal house, so far as appears, were priests. Neither 
the Egyptian nor the Plioenician parallel thus makes it probable that the Heb. 
|n3 should have been used to denote persons who were not really ' priests '.' 

9 — 20 [with the sequel in 1 Ki. 1 — 2]. History 0/ events in David's 
court life, shewing how Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah failed itt 
turn to secure the succession: viz, 9 Mephibosheth {see 16, 1-5; 
19, 25-31); 10 — 12 ike war with Amnion (shewing how David 
became acquainted with Bathsheba, and narrating the birth of 

^ To judge from its derivatives, |13 must have meant to be established firmly, to 
subsist: in Phoen. Arab. Ethiop., in a weaker sense, to exist, be (for which in 
these languages it is the term in ordinary use, as ^l^^, Nlil are in Heb. and Aram.). 
In Syr. the adj. ^^^9 and subst. IcT-L^op have Xhe^tnstoi prosperous, prosperity, 
opulence, etc. { = tv6r]va/y, KanvOvvaiv Jer. 15, 11; tvOr^via, fVTjfiepia, evnpayia) : 
which Fleischer seeks, with questionable success, to connect with the supposed 
root-meaning to stand (as though properly ' wolbestellt,' ' Wolstand '). 

'' Zeitschr.fiir kirchl. Wissenschaft und kirchl. Leben, 1880, p. 63. 

' Notice in 20, 26 the words 'and also^ which likewise imply that Ira, as 
* priest,' stood on no different footing from the 0^3113 of z*. 25. 

286 The Second Book of Samuel, 

Solomofi); 13 circumstances which led to the murder of Amnon ; 
14 — 19 rebellion and death of Absalom ; 20 revolt of Sheba (an 
incident springing out of the revolt of Absalom) \ 

9, I. '•sn] Gen. 29, 15. Comp. on ch. 23, 19. 

2. 'J1 ^IS'K^ rvibS] 'And the house of Saul had a servant,' etc.: 
not as EVV. 

Ttay] See on I 26, 17. 

3. DSNn] except in the sense of save that only {Lex. 67«'), DDN 
occurs in prose only here, 2 Ki. 14, 26. Am. 6, 10, Dn. 8, 25. 

DM^N *iDn] Cf. ''"'> ion I 20, 14. 

4. Tiatt nu] 'in the house of M. : ' see p. 37 n. 

"-an li?] 17, 27 (im N^), Jos. 13, 26 (nm^), on the E. of Jordan, 
probably not far from Mahanaim, Ish-bosheth's capital. 

7. jnx Snc'] 'Cf. "j^jnN p z;. 9 f., hxtr p ne^TSD 19, 25. narpos 

Trarpos (rov of LXX here has the same value as their vlos vlov ^aovX 
19, 25. ''JvS ''^K ""ns does not occur, though naturally it would be no 
impossible combination' (We.). 

8. ... ""3 ^^ay no] 2 Ki. 8, 13. 
non 2^Dn] I 24, 15. II 16, 9t. 

^y.rD3 "(K'N] "itJ'S in a phrase of this sort is idiomatic : Gen. 44, 15 ; 
J^J". 5, 9 (=5, 29. 9, 8). '•JIDD alone would read badly. 

10. nN3n"i] 'and thou shalt bring in (the produce) :' cf. Hag. i, 6, 
and HNUn, of crops, properly what is brought in. 

fexi nn^ y^ia pb .Tni] Read prob. with Luc. Bu. Sm. Ehrl. 
1^3X1 onb Tjnx nnb n'^ni. 

: it: 

III". The words are unsuited to the mouth of Ziba: and the ptcp. 
will not permit the rendering of EVV., 'As for M., said the kii7g, 
he shall eat,' etc. — to say nothing of the awkward and improbable 
position for such a remark on the part of David, after Ziba in 11* 
has signified his assent. LXX for "•JnpK' express in iDr'^, and render 
75N r^frOiiv. With this reading, which is adopted by Keil, We. Bu. Sm. 

^ The sequel to this group of chapters is i Ki. i — 2, which has every appearance 
— except in the verses 2. 3-4 which must have been added by the Deuteronomic 
compiler of the Book of Kings — of being by the same hand, and which narrates the 
failure of David's third son Adonijah to secure the throne, and the confirmation of 
Solomon as his father's successor. 

IX. i—X. 6 287 

Now., the words are a remark of the narrator : 'And M. ate at the 
king's table, as one of the sons of the king.' We. indeed observes 
that they are even then out of place, anticipating z'. 1 3 : however, jy. 1 3 
states the new fact that Mephibosheth dwelt at Jerusalem, his eating at 
the king's table being merely referred to as the ground of his residence 

12. n3''D] See i Ch. 8, 34 ff., where his descendants through many 
generations are enumerated. 

Ch. 10 = 1 Ch. 19. 

10, I. poy ^n l^o] i.e. Nahash (v. 2): see I 11, i. 

3. . . . nn nnjon] Gen. 18, 17 . . . Dni3N» ^jx nDapp; Nu. u, 

29 "h r\m ii^^<}: Tenses, § 135. 4. 

y^Sri] i.e. pjDy >J3 nm (12, 26 al.), or nan (n, i); called by the 
Greeks (from Ptolemy Philadelphus, 285-247 b.c.) Philadelphia, now 
'Amman, with extensive Roman remains of the age of the Antonines, 
on the left (N.) bank of the Jabbok, 25 miles E. of the fords of the 
Jordan near Jericho. See the description in the Survey 0/ East Pal., 
p. 19 ff. 

4- DiT'lID] So I Ch. 19, 4 : but the form (in the sing. [^""?]. ^oni 
a \/'T^9> GK. § 93*) is very unusual, and the only root otherwise 
known is mD. Read probably On^'JIP ; and see on I 17, 38. 

^Jfna] ^Ifn is in pause for 7^ (GK. § 93y), on account of the Tt/ha ; 
cf. Ex. 25, 10 ^m . . Mn\ , . . •<m); and see on I i, 15. 18. The 
'half is not half in length, but half in breadth, one entire side, to 
make them look ridiculous. 

Dn^mntJ' ly] Cf. Is. 20, 4 nK' (rd. *??^b'n) >sVK'n. 

5. ""^'T] So always, according to the Massorah, in Nu. Dt. Sam. Ezr. 
Neh. Chr. and once in Kings (2 Ki. 25, 5; but in the ||, Jer. 52, 8, 
""^l; !) ; "'~\] or '1) in Jos. Jer. and six times in Kings ( + once nhT). 

'ai ny] See on I I, 22. 

nOi^J In ^a/ of plants growing; in /T^/ only of ^a/r (Jud. 16,22. 
Ez. 16, 7 ; and the ll, i Ch. 19, 7+). 

6. inn 1C'N33] See on I 13, 4. i Ch. 19, 6 substitutes IB'Nann 
TH Dy. 

aim n^2] Jud. 18, 281 ; cf. aim v. 8. Nu. 13, 2it. 
smv] See on 8, 3. 

288 The Second Book of Samuel, 

nayo] v. 8. i Ch. 19, 6 (^,■2-^ D"\k). 7 [11 to this z;.]. Gen. 22, 14+ ; 
n3J?» Jos. 13, i3t; TlDyDn Dt. 3, 14. Jos. 12, 5. 13, II. x-^.ch. 23, 34. 
2 Ki. 25, 23. I Ch. 4, 19. Jer. 40, 8t. On nayo n''2 ^3X, see on 20, 14. 

C"'X P|?n] These words are out of construction : they cannot be 
rendered legitimately (EVV.) 'with 1,000 men.' Read ^''^ fj^NI (the ] 
of 'concomitance:' p. 29). The 32,000 of i Ch. 19, 6 have been 
supposed to shew (We. al.) that the Chr. did not read 5J'''X ^l^N here, 
and they have hence been regarded as coming in by error from the 
end of the verse ; but their omission leads to fresh difficulties and 
improbabilities in connexion with 31D ty"'N. For 31D, see Jud. 1 1, 3. 5 ; 
and cf. Toij;8iov i Mace. 5, 13. 

7. Dni33n N3^n] EVV. 'the host y(!) the mighty men.' Read 
'Jni. The N3V was the army in general, the D^"i13J a corps of select 
warriors (16, 6. 20, 7. 23, 8 ff.). 

8. nytJTi nns] at the opening of the gate (p. 37 «.). 

9. njT'n] HDn^on ija being treated as a collective (GK. § 145^^): 
comp. Job 16, 16 Kt, n"i»"ion 133 ; and see on I 4, 15. 

i'NlK^''n """11113 (Kt.)] See on i, 21. The combination is, however, 
unusual in prose: Jud. 8, 1 1 DvnN3 ^JI^BTI is very strange. True, 
as Th. remarks, it is more admissible here than it would be in I 26, 2 : 
but no doubt 1 Ch. 19, 10 preserves the original reading "iina ?3D 
i'KiC'U. The Qre is ^NiC'"' ninn h'yo, which is read also by some 
50 MSS. ; but the 3 is supported by the text of Ch. : see also ch. 6, i. 

11. prnn] Cf. I 17, 21. r\W^'h for deliverance (I 14, 45). 

12. P!nn3l] GK. § 54k. 'y\ m,Tl ; cf. I 3, 18. 

14. byro] fro7n attacking: 2 Ki, 3, 27 V^yo lyD""! ; 18, 14 '•^Jyo niC. 
See on I 28, 15. 

16. irynn] Both here and in ch. 8 there is much variation in MSS. 
between "iTyTin and "iTynin. Here MS. authority preponderates in 
favour of "iTynn, as in ch. 8 it preponderated in favour of "lTy^^^. 
The name must evidently be the same throughout. Both in Inscrip- 
tions (Phoen. and Hebrew) and in MSS. T and 1 are often not distin- 
guishable, and only the context enables the reader to know which is 
intended. For the reason stated on 8, 3, the correct form is iTynin. 

D^^n] V. 17 D^Jin. Taken rightly by LXX, Pesh. Targ. as a pr. n. 
Perhaps to be read in Ez. 47, 16 after nn2D (where LXX add HAiayu). 

X. 6— XL II 289 

18. D''K'i2] Probably a lapsus calami for K'^'X : cf. i Ch. 19, 18 
v3"i ^''N. The number of horsemen is disproportionately large. 
Ch. 11, 1 = 1 Ch. 20, I* (f^. II, 2 — 12, 25 is passed by in Ch.), 
11, I. CaN^nn] ^C^^JJOn, as is read by some 40 MSS., Qre, Ver- 
sions, and I Ch. 20, i : comp. 10, 17 beside 16 ; and p. 16% footnote. 

3. yTk^Tin] I Ch. 3, 5 yiK^-nn, no doubt to be pronounced Vlf "DS, 
and probably merely an error for y3K'T!3. LXX has everywhere 
the strange corruption Brjpa-afSee. 

DV^s] in I Ch. 3, 5 ^N^cy, which (We.) supports MT. against 
LXX 'EAta^.— -10N>1 SC. -ICINH (on I 16, 4). 

''nnn nnis] one of David's famous D"'"ll33 (23, 39). 

4. '31 ncnpntt ^<''^1] A circumstantial clause, defining the state of 
Bath-sheba at the time of ilDy 221^^'') = ' as she purified herself from 
her uncleanness' (cf. 13, 8). This is the only rendering of the words 
consistent with grammar. To express, ' and when she was purified 
etc., she returned . . .,' the Hebrew would have been ^C'ni . . . K''|ji^rini, 
or (Jud. 18, 3 etc.) r^2^ N^ni . . . ^f^pnr} X^n-, in other words, to 
express anything subsequent to i^fsy 3I^'*1^ a finite verb, not the ptcp., 
would have been employed. The athfiah is thus in its right place 
(against Th. We.)^ Comp. Tenses, § 169 note. 

6. n^C' asv ^K . . . rb^"''\'] ' Without -|r2N?, as 19, 15, cf Nu. 23, 7 
before HD^ ' (We.). 

8. 1^?Dn nxe^D] Comp. Gen. 43, 34. 

10. xn nnx TTID Nl!?n] Notice the position of ■jinn: cf Gen. 16, 8. 

11. Tl"'! bx N13X "'JXl]='and shall /enter into my house.?' etc., 
the juxtaposition of two incongruous ideas, aided by the tone in which 
the words are pronounced, betokening surprise, and so suggesting 
a question. So not unfrequently, as Jer. 25, 29 1p2ri npsn Dnxi. 45, 5. 

49, 12 npan T\\>'i xin nnxi. Jon. 4, n Dinx x^ '•jxi. Ez. 20, 31 

DD^ C'i'lX ''JX1. 35, 25b. Jud. 14, i6l>*T'?X TjSl. Zech. 8, 6. ch. 15, 20. 
Comp. on I II, 12 and ch. 18, 29. 33"J7 by GK. § 45c. 

^ nnXtSUO is explained rightly by Lucian ef d<p(Spov avTTJs, Pesh. o^ea^D «>> 
(see Lev. 15, 19. 20. 25 LXX and Pesh.) : Rashi nm^D. The remark is added to 
shew why conception followed: the time indicated was favourable for it. Cf. 
\V. R. Smith, Marriage and Kinship in Early Arabia^ p. 276, ed. 2, p. 133. 

1 QfiJ^ U 

290 The Second Book of Samuel, 

ntfSJ ^m ITl] This form of the oath does not occur elsewhere, and 
the tautology implied makes it improbable. LXX for TTI 7ra)s='n''??- 
* But thus absolutely, as it seems, 'H''^ could at most stand — at least 
that is the case in Arabic — when what here is placed before at the 
beginning of the verse followed as a circumstantial clause with \ 
Either, therefore, read for Tin, mn'' ""H [followed by Itj'Si ini, as I 20, 
3. 25, 26 al.], or omit Itt'SJ Til as an explanatory gloss on the un- 
common I'Tl' (We.). For T^'S3 ""ni, see on I 17, 55. 

12. mnJDDl] 'and on the morrow' (not as Th. : see Lev. 7, 16). 
A specification of time is, however, desiderated 'm.v. 13 for 17 Nip^l ; 
and as even in MT. the promise 'jn^ti'N "iriDl is not carried out by 
David, it is better to end v. 12 at Ninn Xl\^l'. N~ip''"i mnooi will then 
begin z'. 13 ("l as I 4, 20). So We. Bu. Now. : also LXX (Luc.) and 
Pesh. mnnn \T1 (Ehrlich) would, however, be better; \T might 
easily have been lost after "1 Ninn. 

15. inn] if correct, un give,-=sel (like |n3) : but the case goes 
beyond other usages of 3n, 13n {Lex. 396t»); and perhaps N^i^ (LXX 
cto-ayaye) should be read (Klo. Bu. al.). 

i6. h^ , , , "TlDti'a] Comp. (in 3. friendly sense) I 26, 15. 

17. ''31 Di?n p] fro?n the people some of {v. 24. Ex. 16, 27), etc. 

19. "'?'!?] preceded by its object: comp. Dt. 28, 56. Lev. 19, 9, 
and the Aramaic examples cited in Tenses, § 208. 3 Obs. 

21. nrj'aT'] For ^yni'' (Jud. 7, i al). Unlike Ishbosheth and 
Mephibosheth, however, the alteration in this case has been made 
only in a single passage. 

22. 3KV ^rb^ "l:^'N-^D ns*] LXX continues :nnn^»n naT^D nx 

Nibn ^ym^ p i^n^ns* nt< n:)n ""d :nninn i^ya ^sn -ic'n nx Dnyn^ 
h>^ Dnt:':3 njD^ pnn noM noinn ^yo 2di h^d v^y n3''!?K'n n-^K 
(z;. 23) 'J1 ~iDK''1 : nriinn : in other words, the text of LXX describes 
in detail how what Joab anticipated vv. 21-2 took place. The 
addition is a necessary one : for as the text stands, the terms in 
which the messenger speaks in v. 23^ are unexplained (notice especially 
his opening words. Because etc., which presuppose a question to 
have been asked). 

23. 1123 ""j] as the text stands, 13 is the *? recitativurn (on I 2, 16) ; 

XL II— XII. 8 291 

with the insertion from LXX (see on v. 22), it will be ' Because,' intro- 
ducing the answer to David's question. 

DiTpy ^^^J"l] ' appears to be correct. Comp. e.g. the use of rTTi 
with nriN I 12, 14. Ex. 23, 2: the stress rests upon the preposi- 
tion, the idea of which it is simply the purpose of iTn to render 
verbal' (We.). 

24. D\snon iN-i^i (Kt.)] as if from N"i^ (cf. N^^''!' for nirfj 2 Ch. 
26, 15); Qre Dni'Sn nM, the regular form, from HT : GK. § 75". 

25. nin "imn DN . . , y-C-i^N] r\)r\ imn, though grammatically a 
nominative, is construed Kara trvvecriv as an accusative. Comp. I 20, 13 
(if 3D''^ be read); Jos. 22, 17; Neh. 9, 32 : Ew. § 277d end; GK. 
§ 117I; Lex. 85*0. 

nni nb] So Jud. 18, 4. I Ki. 14, 5t. 

inpTm] 'strengthen — i.e. encourage (Dt. r, 38 al.) — him (Joab).' 

27. nsDN'-i] eiDN as Jos. 2, 18 nn^an ^^^N '•aoxri, Dt. 22, 2; Jud. 

19, 15 (Pi)- 
12, I. mi] for K'"! (as v. 3); see GK. §§ 23^, 72P. ( ^ t^f"^) 

2. ■l''k;^'yp] "»''tJ'y^ would be expected, and should prob. be read, 

3. Ov"^;!] and kept alive : Ex. i, 17. 18. i Ki. 18, 5. 
''jl ?rxn] The impff. expressing significantly its habit. 

4. Tti'JJn ti'''Np] The punctuation (for 5^""^^^) is anomalous. Comp. 
on I 6, 18; and Ew. § 293a; GK, § 126X (read ^'''^). 

5. DID p] See on I 20, 31. 

6. DTiynix] LXX €^riy3B', in all probability the 
original reading. As Th, remarks, David speaking impulsively is 
more likely to have used the proverbial 'sevenfold' (cf, Prov. 6, 31), 
than to have thought of the law Ex. 21, 37: DTiymx will be due 
to a corrector who noticed the discrepancy. 

^Dn N^ Tt:'S ^yi] Schill (^ZAW. 1891, p, 318), Ehrlich, Bu,, 
attractively, though not necessarily, i^ for N^ ' and spared that 
which was his own.' 

7^, Observe the emphatic ""^JK : compare — likewise in a reproach — 
Amos 2, 9. 10, 

8. Ti^f< nn ns'] Possibly l^JiN n? ns (Pesh. ^N nun nx) should 

be read (Sm. Bu.), with allusion to Michal : 'n n''3 ns* certainly does 
not harmonize with the following *lp'>n3. 

u 2 

292 The Second Book of Samuel^ 

TiJlN ■'tJ'a DNl] Not elsewhere recorded of David, though it would 
be in accordance with Oriental custom (16, 22. i Ki. 2, 17; cf. 
ch. 3, 7). 

mirril ^N1B''> nn nx] Pesh. "•l '* rii^n ns, perhaps rightly (Sm. 
Bu.) : the meaning of course would be not that they were given to 
him actually, but that he could choose his wives from them as he 
pleased (3, 2-5). 

nSDNl] ' then would I add ' (not ' would have added' AV.). There 
is a similar mistake in AV. o{\\r. 81, 15. 16. 

The 1, as thus used, is rare: but see Gen. 13, 9 {Tenses, % 136/?*). 

njns") r\yr::^ i. e. other similar marks of favour : cf. nni nis (11,25). 
nxDI riXT3 (17, 15), said where details need not be specified. 

9. 121] Probably to be omitted with Luc. and Theod. : cf. esp. 
V. 10^. Notice the emph. position of nniN HN, 'lnt^'N HNI, and "iflK. 

1 1 . T"!?"!^] The yod is not the yod of the plural, but is due to the 
fact that yi is properly ny"> re' ay (cf. inyT : comp. n''^?^ alluring her 
Hos. 2, 16: rff^ Is. 22, II (Ew. § 256b; 01. p. 250; GK. § 9333). 

12. *13J] in front of expressing more strongly than ''JS7 the idea of 
being conspicuous before: comp. Nu. 25, 4 ; i Ki. 21, 13. 

13. nin'' DJ] Yahweh, also, on His part : the D3 correlativum ; cf. on 
I I, 28a. 

Tiayri] The same figure, lit. to make to pass away, in 24, 10: comp. 
Zech. 3, 4 ^:1y T'^yo in">3yn. Job 7, 2 1 ''Jiy nx T-nyni. 

14. '»"'' ''3''N nx] fNJ does not elsewhere mean to cause to blaspheme: 
so doubtless Geiger is right {Urschrift, p. 267) in supposing the 
original reading here to have been ''"1 nx : cf. the insertion of i2''N in 
I 25, 22. For ^i?!!?, see on 5, 14. 

15. C'3S''1] for this pausal form of ^}r, see GK. §§ 29(1, 51"!; and cf. 
on I 15, 23. 

16. 'y\ Wi] A series of perfects with waw conv., indicating that 
David acted as here described repeatedly. 

3DD'1 jh] LXX (B) omits 3Dti>i; Luc. omits ^\ and expresses 
pK'B iyi}\ (i Ki. 21, 27), — not (Sm. Bu. Now.) p'^i^n ^\ for koX Iko.- 
Qfxshiv represents lyDX not pi. 

17. K"12] Read, wiih many MSS. and edd. nnn ; see on 3, 35. 

18. nyn nc^'yi . . . ntONJ T^<] The two verbs are coupled together 

XIL 8-2y 293 

under the government of T'X, exactly as Gen. 39, 9 {Tenses, § 115 
s. V. T^n), though the change of subject makes a literal rendering hardly 
intelligible in English. RV. text and margin are merely two different 
paraphrases, designed to meet the exigencies of English idiom. 

20. ^0*1] The Hif. only here; cf. GK. § 73? Read TjO^I (Ehrl.). 

21. Ti "I^^^ "inyn] for the sake of the child (when) alive: LXX 

rightly eVcKa rov TraiSapiou crt ^wvtos. But iy3 (aS 2^. 22) for ~iay3 

(n=-l, and 3 repeated by error), as We. conjectured in 187 1, and 
as is confirmed by Luc. Pesh. Targ., is much more probable (so Sm. 
Bu. Ehrl. etc.). (In Jer. 14, 4 read, with Duhm, ^rin nm^n nnj? for 
nnn hotn.-i inyn.) 

22. "':3n^ yni'' 'O Kt.; '•^im ynv "D Qre] zf;y^o /f«ozm/=peradventure. 
The correction of the Qre is unnecessary : the Kt. is exactly like Joel 
2, 14. Jon. 3, 9. In Esther 4, 14 we have . . . QX yiV ^D. 

23. DV ''JX nr no!?] nr adds point to r\t:h (on I 10, n): cf. Gen. 
25, 22 ''23X nr nob to what purpose should I yet be ? 

25. ni'B'M] We. Bu. ^ncb^'l (Now. D^f Jl) a?z^ /^^ (David) delivered 
him into, etc., viz. for his education. But to make wholly over to, 
to deliver up, is an Aram, sense of D'^i'ti'n (e.g. Dt. 32, 30 Onk. 
prcijC'X for DT?9'^' ^^<^ f^^^^l constantly for irapaSovvaL), in Heb. 
found at most in late poetry (Is. 38, 12. 13 LXX, Duhm, al. ; Is. 42, 19 
DpK'O by conjecture for ^}^V) ; so it is not a very likely word to have 
been used here. With npti^'l, it is an improvement to begin the 
verse with unx nin^l. 

'«"'' nnyn] Luc. 1"'' nana, — perhaps rightly (Sm. Now. Dh.). 
12, 26 = 1 Ch. 20, 1^ (abridged); 12, 30-31 = 1 Ch. 20, 2-3. 

26. n3i70n T>y] The 'royal city' would be Rabbah itself, whereas 
(27) Joab had taken only what was called the Water-city, and (28) 
invited David to take Rabbah itself. Read therefore, probably, as 
V. 27, con Ty (Bu. Sm. Now. Dh.). 

27. □''On Ty] No doubt a fortification, or part of the city, which protected 
the water-supply. Polybius (v. 71) relates that when Rabbah was besieged by 
Antiochus III in B.C. 218, he was unable to enter the city till a prisoner revealed 
the underground passage by which the besieged used to descend to fetch water. 
The remains of a citadel are on a hill about ^ mile N. of the Jabbok, 200-300 ft. 
above the valley, and connecting by a saddle with hills further to N. ; on this 
saddle there is a fine rock-cut tank, 20 ft. by 90 ft. ; and just inside the entrance 

294 The Second Book of Samuel, 

to this tank there begins an underground passage leading in the direction of the 
citadel, which it has been supposed was the one mentioned by Polybius (see 
G. A. Barton, y/5Z. xxvii. (1908), p. 147 ff., esp. 149 f. ; and Qo'cvAtx, Survey of 
E. Palestine, p. 34, with the Plan facing p. 34). The fortification surrounding 
either this or some other water-supply vvas doubtless the ' Water-city ' men- 
tioned here. 

28. ""JX lii'S' Jd] 'Lest / (emph.) take the city,' etc.: comp. Ex. 
18, 19. Jud. 8, 23. 2 Ki. 10, 4. Is. 20, 6. Jer. 17, 18. i//. 109, 28 al. 
ch. 17, 15 ''JS TlVj;"'; and comp. on I 17, 56. 23, 22. 

rT'^y IDC' NipJl] 'And my name he called over it' — in token viz. 
of its conquest by me. The passage shews the genuine sense of the 
phrase, often occurring (especially in Dt. and dependent books) with 
reference to the nation, the city, or the Temple, ' over which Yahweh's 
name is called,' in token viz. of the right of possession or ownership 
by Him (generally paraphrased obscurely in AV. ' called by My 
name^'). See Am. 9, 12 Dn''i?y ^m? N~lpJ "ltt'^< (in allusion to the 
nations embraced by David in the dominion of Israel). Dt. 28, 10 

l^^y N-ipj ■'"'' DC' ""3 pxn '•Dy ^3 is-n. i Ki. 8, 43 (n^an ^y). Jer. 
7, 10. II. 14, 9. 15, 16 (of the prophet). 25, 29 al. Is. 63, 19 we are 
become as those over whom Thy name has not been called (i, e. whom 
Thou hast never owned). 

30. DD^JD] LXX D3?0 (i Ki. II, 5 al.)— probably rightly. In the 
whole context, no allusion is made to the king of Rabbah ; nor has 
there been any mention of the people, but only of the city, so that, 
with the Massoretic punctuation, the suffix D-:;^ is without an antecedent. 

n-ip"" pNl] Read, with Pesh. Targ. here, and i Ch. 20, 2 : P^ ^21 
nipn A 'talent' of gold weighed 65, if not 130, lbs. av. (Kennedy, 
DB. iv. 903^). 

31. i^T-ian ^xnn] Cf. Am. i, 3 ^nin nixnn. 

p?D3] So Kt., which Th. following Kimchi defends, supposing 
the meaning to be the place in which victims were sacrificed to 
Molech (punctuating either Dsp^l in their 'Molech,' or DbpS? in the 
Molech-image). But such a sense for either 'JJ^'b or D3-^D is highly 
improbable ; and the Qre ]'i^^''?^ must be adopted. The meaning of 
P/ID, however, has only recently been cleared up. From its form 

1 Which really expresses a different phrase, '•JDtJ'2 NTp3 Is. 43, 7 : ct. 48, i. 

XIL 28-}i 295 

(with D prefixed), it would naturally be supposed to denote either 
a place (like ^^^P) or instrument (like D^SO) of making bricks, but 
not the one rather than the other. It has, indeed, been commonly 
rendered as though it meant the former, viz. brickkiln: but this 
rendering lacks support either in the use of the word elsewhere or 
in the renderings of the ancient Versions. In an elaborate study 
on the word^ Georg Hoffmann has shewn that in post-Biblical 
Hebrew, it is used firstly of a hnckmould, and then metaphorically 
of different objects of the same rectangular shape, such as the frame 
of a door, sofa, window, or again, of a garden-bed, but not of 
a brick/^z7«. In Arabic and Syriac the corresponding words are used 
similarly : ^jli.^ denotes a brickmould (Freytag), and occurs also in 
Saadyah's version of Is. 6, 4 of the framework of a door ; Ur^N.-io 
signifies a brickmould (PS. col. 1887), as also a quadrangle or square 
(Hoffmann, p. 65) : but for neither language is the meaning brickkiln 
quoted. Nor is this meaning required for either of the two other 
passages in the OT. in which pbo occurs. In Nah. 3, 14 p/JD '•pnnn 
the rendering ' lay hold of the brickmould ' (in preparation for a siege, 
immediately following ' go into the clay, and tread the mortar ') is as 
suitable as 'make strong the brickkiln;' and in Jer. 43, 9 a 'brick- 
kiln ' in front of Pharaoh's palace would be by no means so suitable 
a spot for the prophet to deposit in it his symbolical stones, as 
a square, or open quadrangle, in the same position, especially if, 
as appears from v. 10, the stones were to mark the site upon which 
Nebuchadrezzar's throne was to be erected. Nor again, is the mean- 
ing brickkiln recognized by any of the ancient Versions. Here, LXX 

have SiT^yayev avToi'S 8ta, rov ivXivBlov , Luc. irepLrjyayt.v avrov^ iv 
MaSefifta, Pesh. ^jt^o-Aj^s ^oj/ i^i^lo, Targ. N^"51tr3 Jinn» "njl 

' ZATIV. 1882, pp. 53-72. See also Levy, Neuhebr. Wb'rterbuck, s. v. 

2 ' Led them through the brickmould,' the sense being, at least, not worse than 
that of Jerome's ' traduxit in typo laterum,' or of countless other passages in the 
LXX Version. XlkivBlov has been supposed to mean ' hnckkiln : ' but no such 
sense is recognized in the last edition of Liddell and Scott's Lexicon. 

* Made them pass through the measure, — meaning, perhaps (PS. 2237), some 
arrangement for allotting them to different forms of punishment i^ch. 8, 2) ; cf. 
Nestle, Margin. 17. Comp. also i;^^/ )lisd»»a*:» K*jil in a Mace. 4, 12 
(cited PS. //'.). 

296 The Second Book of Samuel^ 

and he dragged them through the streets, Vulg. et traduxit in typo 
lateriim : in Nah. 3, 14 LXX KaTaKpdr-qrrov vnip -rrXCvOov, Pesh. o.ia S to 
U^^^^ (brickmould), Targ. T'j''''J''n ''S''priN (thy building), Vulg. te}ie 
later em: in Jer. 43, 9 pi^m D7D3 LXX probably ornit^ 01 Xonroi' iv 
tQ Kpuc^to) iv Tw ttXlvOlu), Pesh. M,^\vi^ )..^..ii_>o,3 (in the quadrangle), 
Targ. ^^'''11 biDt^n in the mortar of the building, Vulg. in crypta 
quae est sub muro latericio. Thus usage, whether of Hebrew or of 
the cognate languages, or as interpreted by ancient authority, offers 
no support to the meaning brickkiln for p^D. Hence Hoffmann, in 
the article referred to, holds the common interpretation of this passage 
to be incorrect, and reading 'T'^.y.'Ii for Ti^yn would render, 'And he 
brought forth the people that were therein, and set them to saws, and 
to harrows of iron, and to axes of iron, and made them labour at the 
brickmould:' in other words, instead of torturing them, employed 
them in different public works ^ This view of the passage is accepted 
by Stade I^Gesch. Isr. i. 278), We. Bu. Now. Sm. Konig, NKZ. 1891, 
p. 667, Nestle, al., and is represented on the margin of the Revised 
Version, 'l D5^ in the sense of to set a?nong-=to employ about ^ may 
be illustrated from I 8, 11 in33"iIDa 'h Dti'l. i Ch. 20, 3 has indeed 
"IK'^I and saived for Dti'"*! : but this may be either a textual corruption, 
or a mistaken interpretation of the compiler. Certainly, if we could 
honestly relieve David of the act of cruelty, which the Hebrew text 
here appears to attribute to him, we should be glad to do so : no 
doubt, it may be shewn to be in harmony with the manners of the 
age (Am. i, 3 of the Syrians of Damascus), but it is alien to all that 
we know of the personal character and temper of David. Hoffmann's 
view is unquestionably an attractive one ; and the only ground which 
may occasion hesitation in accepting it, is the circumstantiality in 
the mention of three separate kinds of instruments, ' saws ' and 
' harrows '" and ' axes,' and the character of the instruments themselves, 

^ Or express by iv irpoOvpois. But tv ■npoOvpois Iv ttvKti are more probably a 
double rendering of PinSIl, — the former in accordance with the rendering elsewhere 
in Jer. of riDS (i, 15. 19, 2. 26, 10. 36, 10), and kv TrvXri a correction. 

2 Cf. how Mesha' employed his Israelite prisoners (Inscr. 11. 25-6). 

^ Under (AV.) is a paraphrase of '3 in no way necessitated by the Hebrew. 

XII. )i—XIII. 9 297 

both of which might have been expected to be somewhat more 
general, had the narrator merely intended to state that the Ammonites 
were put to forced work by David. On the other hand, it js true 
that the sense brickkiln cannot be shewn to be expressed by p^O 
in any other passage where it occurs in either Biblical or post-Biblical 
Hebrew, or even in the cognate languages. The correction of 'T'3j;n 
into T-ayn is, of course, no source of difficulty. The terms employed 
in the first part of the verse favour the common interpretation of 
the passage : the term p^» — so far as our knowledge of it goes — 
favours as decidedly — not to say more so — Hoffmann's view. The 
state of our knowledge is not sufficient to enable us to arrive at 
a decision with entire confidence. But those who refuse to allow 
the meaning brickkiln for p^D may at least claim to have a sound 
philological basis for their opinion. 

rrc'y] Luc. rightly cTrotei. Comp. the same tense in the description 
of the behaviour of an invading army, 2 Ki. 3, 25. 

13, 2. mi^nnn^ |1:12N^ nv'-l] ' And Amnon was distressed (Josephus 
XaAeTTois 8t€KetTo : cf. I 13, 6. 28, 15), SO that he made himself sick,' 
etc. The athnah would stand better at innx (Th. Ke. We. al), what 
follows stating the reason why Amnon felt such distress : ' Because 
she was a virgin, and (this being so) it was hard,' etc. 

3. nyJOti^] See on I 16, 9. Jonadab was cousin both to Absalom 
and Tamar and to Amnon. 

Q3n] ' subtil ' (AV. RV.) is scarcely a fair paraphrase : the text 
says that Jonadab was wise. {Sublil=-Q)~\]j Gen. 3, i.) 

4. ans '•JX . , . 1?rn ns] The regular order with the ptcp. and 
pronoun: Gen. 37, 16. 41, 9 etc. [Tenses, § 208. 3; GK. § 142*' 
{d) fiole). 

5. Pnnni] 'and make thyself sick' — here and v. 6 in pretence (GK. 
§ 54^), V. 2 in reality. — On niDNI , . . T'DN sai see on I 19, 3. 

9. mC'D] Only here. The etymology is not apparent : but the 
meaning appears to be established by the Aram. JT'IDIS, which clearly 
signifies //a/^ or pa7i (Lev. 2, 5 ; Ez. 4, 3 al. Targ. : for n?n^). LXX 
Tiqyavov, as always for roiiro. Kon. ii. 184 thinks it may be an old 
corruption of n3nD, and, as such, the source of the Targ. rTiiDO. 
For pifril, see GK. § 71. 

298 The Second Book of Samuel, 

'•i'yo K'VS* ^3 1N''Vin] So Gen. 45, i. hvo^from atkndatice on. 

10. '"'"'"'fJD] The lengthening of the H of nninn in pause involves 
the change of the preceding n to n, the collocation nn being avoided. 
So ''n?< becomes in pause not ''n^?, but ''nK; see GK. § 29^'. 

12. p ni^T'N^ ■'3] The impf. as Gen. 34, 7; cf. 20, 9. 
nB'yn-i?N] GK. § vsbh- Ew. § 224c; Stade, § 143^^ (3); Delitzsch 

on Is. 64, 3; Konig, i. p. 531. 

n^2J] Jud. 19, 23 riNTn ni^ajn nx IC^yn b^; and comp. the phrase 
!?N">K'''n rh'21 HK'J? Gen. 34, 7; Dt. 22, 21 (^nk^'yJ); Jer. 29, 23 (each 
time of a sexual offence) ; Jos. 7, 15 (of Achan's impiety). The word 
expresses more than 'folly.' Just as ^2^ (2, 33: see more fully on 
I 25, 25) denotes one who lacks all regard for God or man, so n^3J 
means godlessness, ivipiety. It is applied, both here and elsewhere, 
to immorality, but it does not specifically denote immorality. The 
ideas which the Hebrews associated with the word appear with especial 
distinctness in Isaiah's description of the ^nJ (32, 6); see on I 25, 25. 

13. Dv3Jn nriN'a] For the form of the comparison, comp. 2, 18. 
. 14. r\yao priT'l] 'and overpowered her.' Cf. I 17, 50. 

nriN aDt^'M] When yz'V is used of illicit intercourse, the pronoun 
with nx is regularly pointed by the Massorites as though it were 
the object of the verb in the accus. (Gen. 34, 2. Lev. 15, 18. 24. 
Nu. 5, 13. 19. Ez. 23, 8). It is doubtful whether this is not an 
arbitrary distinction on the part of the punctuators, and whether in 
all cases the word was not originally intended to be the prep. nriN 1. 
(i) There is no other indication of 335^* being construed with an 
accus. — the Qre in Dt. 28, 30 nj33EJ''' obviously proving nothing as 
to the usage of the living language ; (2) Qy lyi? is used constantly 
in the same sense (11, 4; Lev. 15, 33; Dt. 22, 22-29, etc.), and 
if so, Dy and nf< being closely synonymous, there is a strong pre- 
sumption that DN l^i? was understood in a similar sense. 

15. nht: nxjc* . . . nsjc'^i] GK. § 1171. 

nanSD] Read nnnxno, which is needed. 

16. '31 nilN"bN] The text is untranslateable : neither RV. nor 

^ In Ez. the form is indeed nniS; but in this book (as in Jer.) the prep, is 
constantly written -niN instead of -flK (e.g. 3, 22) : see on ch, 24, 24. 

XII I. g~i8 299 

RV. m. is a rendering of it. Thie text of LXX has been corrected 
to agree with the Hebrew : but what is evidently the fragment of 
a genuine rendering has been preserved out of its place in v. 15, 

viz. /jLCL^wv r] KaKia r/ f.(r)(aT7j 17 rj ■!rpMT7]-=<^^^^'y}'Q ^IIO^t ^^"^^ 117113, 
Lucian's recension of LXX has M77, dSeA^e* on fxeydXy] 17 naKia y 
i(r)(aTr] vTrep Tr]v irpoiTrjv rjv 7re7rotr;fcas /xer' ifiov, tov i^aTroaTeiXai fxi. j 

and similarly the Old Latin, ' Noli frater expellere me, quoniam maior 
erit haec malitia novissima quam prior quam fecisti mecum, ut 

dimittas me,' i.e. '•OP T\'^'^V '^^^ J^insriD nsTn niiin n^n: ""3 ^■^^{ b^ 

''livbul'. This substantially must be adopted, the only question being 
whether in the middle clause we accept mnxHD nsin (Luc.) or ninxn 
n:::'X-inD (as in Cod. B). The former deviates least from MT., and is 
adopted by Sm. : but We. Now, prefer the latter, arguing that MT. 
JT^nXD (without the art.) attests indirectly the reading of Cod. B ninNH, 
and considering that the corruption of mnsn into mnN?D necessitated 
its transposition, and the alteration of n3C>N"intD to riNTn. Bu. expresses 
no preference. Either form, it is evident, expresses substantially the 
same sense. For ^x in deprecation, comp. Jud. 19, 23. 

17. nxrnN] See on I lo, 27. 

vyD] not ■'jyiND, but ''i?yD, the word used of dismissing a menial 
{v. 9), or one whose presence was obnoxious, Ex. lo, 28 vyJD "J?. 

18. 19. D''D2 njni] Elsewhere only Gen. 37, 3. 23. 32. As to the 
meaning, the earliest authorities are divided ; and it cannot be said to 
be established beyond reach of doubt. LXX in Gen. x'^rwv ttoikiAo? 
(so Pesh. here), here ;)(itwv Kapirmros (i.e. with sleeves reaching to the 
ivrtst : so Pesh. in Gen.) ; Luc. here -^ltwv do-TjoayaXwros (i.e. reaching 
to the ankles) ; Aq. in Gen. ^. aa-TpayaXwv, here x- Ka/aTrwros ; Symm. 
in both places x- x^'-P'-^*^'''^^ i^-^- ^^^^'^^d: Hdt. 7. 61); Jerome in Gen. 
(following LXX) tunica polymita, here (as Aq. in Gen.) tunica talaris. 
Targ. Onk. and Jon.^ ^SST WITT'S, transliterating. D3 in Aram, 
means the palm of the hand (Dan. 5, 5. 24; of. \!i\t fern. I 5, 4 al. 
Targ.), or sole of the foot (Dt. 2, 5 Pesh.). Thus both alternative 
renderings have ancient authority in their favour. On the whole, 
however, as the explanation '■parti-coloured tunic' implies a sense of 

1 Targ. Jerus. and Ps.-Jon. on Gen. ("1^*Xp or) n"'^1SD Tl2"lD a variegated tunic. 

300 The Second Book of Samuel, 

D"'DD {patches), which has no sufficient philological basis, the other 
explanation ' a tunic reaching to the hands and feet' ('a long-sleeved 
tunic/ Sm. ; ' a long garment with sleeves,' RV. marg) — notwith- 
standing that wrists or ankles might have been expected to be named, 
rather than D''DQ (if the word be rightly explained as = Aram. DD) — 
is the more probable. 

1 8. mc^ni^n p ^a] Cf. Gen. 50, 3 D^£2:nn ^d^ ^\^%> p ^3. 

D^b^ytt] We. Bu. Now. Sm. Ehrl. D^iy?. The h'V^ was distinct 
from the nJDa {DB. i. 625^ 3a; EB. Mantle: cf. Ex. 28, 4). 
bvy(\ so Jud. 3, 23. Cf. on I I, 12 ; and GK. § 112**. 

19. HT] Read n''X with LXX ; and see Jer. 2, 37 (Ehrl.). 

"^ijyp T^'"" 1''J^'l] The waib conv. and the pf. indicating reiteration, 
Jos. 6, 13. But read probably pyTI [so Stade, Akad. Reden u. Abhandl. 
1899, p. 199] S the normal construction: see on I 19, 23. 

20. }"iJ''r:N] pJCN is not a compound pr. n., and hence I13''0^? can 
be no alternative form (as inx and nj^S, ^^ON and ^EJ'^nN, D1^C3^? 
and DI^C'nK). In Arabic, the "• is used to form diminutives (as kalh 
dog, kiilaib litde dog: Wright, i. § 269), even in pr. names; and it 
has accordingly been supposed (Ew. § xd^^, Bo.) that the form 
Aminon here is a diminutive used intendonally by Absalom, for the 
purpose of expressing his contempt for Amnonl It is true, as We. 
remarks, that ' the Arabic inner diminutive-formation is akin to ten- 
dencies in that language which are foreign to Hebrew : ' nevertheless, 
there are examples of forms and constructions occurring in isolation 
in Hebrew, which are idiomatic only in Arabic ; so that this explanation 
of pj''ON must not be pronounced altogether impossible. The alternative 
is to treat * as a clerical error. — Dy iTH, as Gen. 39, 10. 14 (Th. Ke.). 

1 Not (Bu.) npytl, which would require a preceding napn (I 17, 41): W 
Kpaiovaa. is no proof that LXX read T\\>^\\ : see 15, 30. Jud. 14, 9. 

' So also Wright, I.e., who adds, with Ew., as another example from Hebrew 
paiSK^, remarking that the ""^^ in these two words must be regarded as a weaken- 
ing of "•-;;- (orig. \-^'), as in Hv?. '^'^^^. in Heb., and )l.><\>'^V. a youth, in Syr., 
are almost certainly diminutives; perhaps \\yy^'^\ Job 42, 14 (for nD"'C^ a little 
dove, from Arab, yemdtndh, a dove) is another. See further GK. (Engl, transl.) 
§ %(fi footnote ; Lagarde, Bildung der Norn. 87-89 ; and on diminutives in the 
Mishnah, .Segal, Mihiaic Hebrew, p. 64. 

XIIL i8-2) 301 

'h :b r\^'] See on I 4, 20. 

i^?^*^]] ' and that desolate.' The 1 is peculiar, though just defen- 
sible (GK. § 154a note {b); Lex. 252^): but probably it should be 
deleted. Or an adj. may have fallen out before it; but not 35^^ (Bu.), 
for an adj. only follows "H^n (see on I 14, 19). In form HDOb' is 
a ptcp., either Qal (Siegfr.-Stade, Heb. WB.; Lex. 1030*'), or Po'el 
(Kon. ii. 106) with the D dropped, as happens sometimes, esp. 'where 
the ptcp. becomes a mere adj. or subst.' (Ew. § i6oa: cf. ]y^V (beside 
fP-iyj?), ^.i'^y (beside ^.^iVO), Dn">^tJ' (from "ilB') insidious eyers, often in 
the Psalms ; and Kon. /. c). The fem. with pre-tonic sere is found 
both in an ordinary ptcp. in pause, even with a minor disj. accent, 
as here and Is. 33, 14 nBaiX K'Nt, and in a ptcp. used as a subst., as 
n"J.^i;, n-jnip a buckler, ./^. 91, 4 (Stade, § 2140; GK. § 84^9). The 
forms nnoiti>, D^rpioitj' etc. recur Is. 49, 8 nijot?'^ ni^m. 54, I can 
^'^'9>^ V.f Lam. I, 4. 13 HDOV^ ^:3n;. 16. Dan. 9, 26 (all with disj. 

D17K'2N T\^'l\ T\'''2.1 "T'ZID (see on I 12, 5), quite needlessly: see 
p. 37 note. 

21. INO 1^ nn^l] LXX after these words express nivns; 3ify N^ 
: Kin inbn ^3 bni< ^3 iJ3 |'i3DK which are accepted by Ew. Th. We. 
Bu. etc. as part of the original text. For 3Xy see i Ki. i, 6; and 
Is. 54, 6 nil rilli'y (Th.). The words, if a gloss, are at any rate 
an instructive one. 

22. niD nyi yiD!? . , . nm ^<!'] i.e. anything at alh Cf. Gen. 31, 
24. 29 ; and also J?!^ N?1 "• 3''J2"'^ N? Zeph. i, 12 ; similarly Is. 41, 23. 
Jer. 10, 5. p^ in yno^, as 6, 19 (Z^or. 58315). 

-IJJ'K -13^ ijy] Dt. 22, 24. 23, 5: GK. § i3oc«. 

23. D''0'' DTlJli'] 'two years, days.' So 14, 28. Gen. 41, i. Jer, 
28, 3. lit: for the pleonastic Cl'"?:'', cf. D'^C ^'^n, CO'' HT, and (in 
late Hebrew, Dan. 10, 2. 3) D^O^ D^yntJ' ; and see Ges. Thes. p. 585b; 
Tenses, §192.1; GK. § 131*1. The ?, to denote the end of a period, as 
Gen. 7, 4. 10. Ex. 19, 15 (rare): Lex. ^I'j^'b. 

CTTJ] Gen. 38, 12. Ba'al Hazor is probably Tell 'Astir, on an 
elevated height 4^ miles NE. of Bethel (Buhl, 177; £B. ii. 1979). 
For Ba'al, see on 5, 20. 

DHDN Dy] W^ = beside is used to denote proximity to a town or 

302 The Second Book of Samuel, 

other spot, as D13'' ny DH Jud. 19, 1 1, i Ki. i, 9, but not to a large area 
such as ' Ephraim : ' were the tribe intended, as Th. rightly observes, 
the phrase used would be Dnssb "iK'fc^ (I 17, i etc.), not dnsK Dy "H^'N. 
Either cmsN is the name of some place not otherwise named, or the 
text is false. The supposition (Bo. Th. Ke.) that the place meant 
is jnsj? 2 Ch. 13, 19 (pisy Qre) derives support from LXX (Luc.) 
To(f>pai/x (Klo.), though it is true that the y in 2 Ch. is not repre- 
sented by r. 

'Ephron is mentioned close after Bethel and Yeshanah (cf. on I 7, 12) ; and has 
been thought to be the same as 'Ophrah (I 13, 17 ; LXX Tocppa), prob. (see note) 
et-Taiyibeh, 4 miles NE. of Bethel, and 2\ miles SE. of Tell 'Asur, in the valley 
below it. Whether this distance is too great to be denoted by Dy, will depend on 
whether Ba'al-Hazor was so much less important than 'Ephron that it was necessary 
for its position to be thus defined. But it is odd that the site of a conspicuous hill, 
such as that on which Ba'al-Hazor was (3318 ft.), should have to be defined by its 
nearness to a place (2850 ft.) nearly 500 ft. in the valley below it. 

25- pa''l] Read -1>»*S>1: see on I 28, 23. So v, 27. 
in313''l] = bade him 'fare-well,' as Gen. 24, 60. 47, 10. ch. 19, 
40 al. 

26. Nrp* K7l] 'Precisely analogous examples of the same con- 
struction are Jud. 6, 13. 2 Ki. 5, 17. 10, 15: the latter demonstrates 
incontrovertibly the correctness of the punctuation, and obliges us 
to render: And if not, let Amnon go with us,' We., excellently. 
Observe the disjunctive accent at vh'\ ^ Cf. Tenses, § 149 end. 

27. "lijDH ''jn-^3] LXX adds "]l?Dn nnK^D3 r]r\^'a n'h^2^ c'y"''). The 
words may, indeed, be an addition, suggested by a reminiscence of 
I 25, 36 : at the same time an express notice of the feast prepared 
by Absalom is quite suitable, and their omission may be due to 

28. '"nnroxi . . . mo^] nit: with 3 is of course the infin. of the verb 
3i£3 (I 16, 16. 23 etc.; Est. i, 10, as here). The tense ^riiDNI as 
I 10, 8, I Ki. 2, 37 etc. {Tenses, § 118; GK. § ii4r). niD, applied 
to the heart, as in Jud. 16, 25 Dn^ niJ2 ••:: (Qre Q^^ 2ia3); 19, 22 Dn 
D3? DN D"'3''D^D; and comp. on I 25, 36. 

^ And so in 2 Ki. 5. In 2 Ki. 10, however, the accentuation expresses a false 
interpretation and is misleading. Render, ' And Jehonadab said, It is. And if it 
is. pive thine hand ' 

is, give thine hand.' 

XIII. 2)~)4 303 

■■^ ^</^] Cf. ^an 9, i. Observe that / is emphatic. 

'31 iprn] Cf. 2, 7. 

30. 1 imn rvori] See on I 9, 5. 

ail*. Read with LXX nnim lynp ri^y D'-nvjn i-inay bat. 

32. no'':;' . . . "•S'^yi:)] , , . 13 ^y may denote according to the mouth 
(i.e. the appointment, commandment) of (AV. : see Ex. 17, i etc.), or 
upon the mouth o/" (Ges. : cf. Ex. 23, 13. \\f. 50, 16): nn'-b' (Kt.) will 
here be the ptcp. pass, of C^b' (cf, Nu. 24, 21), with the sense of 
settled. The sense thus obtained is not unsuitable, though ""3 py is 
not, perhaps, quite the phrase that might have been expected to be 
used with nD''k^', and some clearer statement of the nature of the 
intention then harboured by Absalom is certainly desiderated (cf. the 
addition n''Dn^ 3, 37). Ewald's suggestion respecting the word. Hist. 
iii. 234 (E.T. 172), deserves mention. Comparing the Arabic 'l£ 
sinister et infaustus fuit alicui, llw inauspiciousness, ill-luck, he sup- 
poses it to signify an inauspicious expression, an expression boding 
misfortune (Anglice, a scowl), — 'For upon the mouth of Absalom 
there hath been a scowl since the day when Amnon humbled his 
sister Tamar.' The suggestion is an exceedingly clever one : the 
only doubt is whether a word meaning in itself simply unluckiness 
(Lane, p. 1490) could be used absolutely to signify a token of un- 
luckifiess (ein Ungliickszeichen) for others. It is accepted by We., 
W. R. Smith {Encycl. Brit., ed. 9, art. David, p. 840^ note, cf. ed. 10, 
p. 858b), Now. Sm. Bu. does not decide between this and Ewald's 
alternative suggestion njtp'C' (Ezr. 4, 6t). 

33. "121 ub ^N . . . ncJ''' ^x] * let not my lord the king take aught 
(nan, not nnnn) to heart, saying' etc.: 2^ ^t< DK^ as 19, 20, In 
form, as well as in the use of nnn, the sentence resembles I 22, 15 
"'as nn bn nan naya i^nn dc*^ ^n. 

DX '•a] So Kt. : 13 Qre. ""a is sufficient (cf. 32); and DN may have 
arisen by ditlography from the following word : but DX ^a is defensible, 
the context suggesting the negative to be understood : Ges. (minime,) 
sed solus Amnon mortuus est. Comp. on I 26, 10. 

34. m^C^aj< nnan] The words interrupt the narrative, and are an 
awkward anticipation of 37*. We. Bu. Now., unable to suggest 
anything better, excise them: Ehrlich, very cleverly, suggests anna 

304 The Second Book of Samuel, 

Dl7tJ'3N (forming the end of v. 33). No doubt, the narrator mighl 
have written the words there ; but they seem somewhat superfluous. 
Klo. Cii^^ 1''nN "in^.l (constr. as I 16, 4), which Bu. accepts. 

Vinx TllJO] The text cannot be right. "jni cannot be in the 
si. c. : and ' from //le way ' would need the art. EVV. ' by the way 
of the hill-side behind him ' is no translation of the Heb. LXX has 
an insertion (^koL irapeyevero 6 ct/cottos koI aTnfyyeiXev tw ySacriAct /cat 
CLTrev Aj/opas cwpaica e/c t^9 oSov t^s Q^pwvrjv ck jxipovi tov opovi), which 
enables We. both to restore a text satisfactory in itself, and at the 
same time to remove the difficulties attaching to MT. The text 
as thus restored reads as follows : Tjim D^Jih -inna D^:j!?n m Dy mm 

"inn nifro D^jnh T]-i."n?p ^riw d"'K'3^ -ips»i Tjbs^ nsM nss^n n'3*i. TintD 
is now provided with the desiderated genitive;